Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Mystery:Why is England More Liberal than the United States?

2011-07-18T15:13:42Z

Jdixon: /* A federal England and freedom of speech */

Nice essay! I hope you add more! I have always been wondering this, considering until recently England was more centered towards religion. [[User:NickP|NickP]] 01:15, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

Andy,

This is a very interesting topic, but I think an important point needs to be raised. English liberalism is not a new problem. It's important to keep in mind that many of the first colonists in America came here to escape from what they perceived as laxity within the Church of England, and that the revolutionary war was a reaction to British governmental overreach and over-regulation. In many ways, American conservatism is a RESPONSE to British liberalism. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:38, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:There is no doubt that the roots of revolution were in the overreach of government and taxation. The latter may be characteristic of left leaning (liberal) governments but I think it is a little anachronistic to decribe this a a reaction against "liberalism". Going further, I don't believe the British government of the time, while authoritarian, could be described in terms of either classical liberalism or its current meaning.
:I would add that fundamental reason why Great Britain/UK (I have no idea why this work singles out "England" specifically) and Europe generally have more liberal attitudes has arisen from several historical trends - that this topic needs to expand on - but most notable the contrasting feature of the United States is that its growth and success rests on indiviudal responsibility, liberties and a hostile mindset to big government and tax since the revolution! [[User:Laguardia|Laguardia]]

== The entrenched Church of England ==

I wonder if part of the reason is that the officially entrenched nature of the Anglican Church has caused a complacency amongst the religious over there. In many ways the Church of England has become more of a social organisation than a religious one, and this has had a liberalizing effect on the population on the whole. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 14:43, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:Good point ... and certainly worth adding. I'll include it now, and please feel free to improve.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:01, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

== More liberal ==

Is the UK more liberal? What factors are we judging its liberalism on? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:53, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:England is certainly less [[conservative]] than the U.S.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:07, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
::I am sure that it is but I am just wondering about what factors have been taken into account. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:18, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

== The BBC ==
It's a public broadcaster, which tend to be liberal (look at NPR and PBS in the US) and furthermore, Brits have no choice in funding it, as it's paid for by mandatory TV licenses. Finally, while there is commercial (i.e. non-government TV) in Britain, the BBC is the only free (as in beer, aside from the license) option. Because of the tightly-controlled media, and lack of a free market, it's no wonder liberalism is so rampant there. --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 22:01, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:The BBC is not the only free-to-view broadcaster by any means. Up until the advent of digital television there were five free channels, BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. There are now dozens more free-to-air channels, the vast majority of them being commercial broadcasters. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 22:37, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

::Do you deny that The BBC is the dominant media in England and that it's heavily liberally biased? --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 22:49, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
:::I will answer from my perspective of living in the UK for a year not so long ago. Yes. Liberally biased but not ''heavily'' liberally biased. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:53, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

::::FergusE, rather than turning on me for pointing out a factual error and posing a question that bears no relevance to the point I was making, you could just accept your mistake graciously. I never said it wasn't the dominant media in England. And I do not think it is even possible, or sensible to divide the world up into things which are 'conservative' and things which are 'liberal' as if the two terms are categories set in stone and used in the same way by everyone. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 08:31, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

==A federal England and freedom of speech==

This is quite a slippery argument. England is a much smaller country than the United States and it's hard to see how it would be practical to devise any sort of federal structure. Of course, the United Kingdom is now, essentially, arranged along federal lines. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own assemblies or parliaments.

I don't quite understand the freedom of speech argument. What evidence is there that England is less at home to the right of free expression than is the United States?--[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 11:13, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Mystery:Why is England More Liberal than the United States?

2011-07-18T14:58:54Z

Jdixon: /* A Ffederal England and freedom of speech */

Talk:Mystery:Why is England More Liberal than the United States?

2011-07-18T14:58:14Z

Jdixon:

Nice essay! I hope you add more! I have always been wondering this, considering until recently England was more centered towards religion. [[User:NickP|NickP]] 01:15, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

Andy,

This is a very interesting topic, but I think an important point needs to be raised. English liberalism is not a new problem. It's important to keep in mind that many of the first colonists in America came here to escape from what they perceived as laxity within the Church of England, and that the revolutionary war was a reaction to British governmental overreach and over-regulation. In many ways, American conservatism is a RESPONSE to British liberalism. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:38, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:There is no doubt that the roots of revolution were in the overreach of government and taxation. The latter may be characteristic of left leaning (liberal) governments but I think it is a little anachronistic to decribe this a a reaction against "liberalism". Going further, I don't believe the British government of the time, while authoritarian, could be described in terms of either classical liberalism or its current meaning.
:I would add that fundamental reason why Great Britain/UK (I have no idea why this work singles out "England" specifically) and Europe generally have more liberal attitudes has arisen from several historical trends - that this topic needs to expand on - but most notable the contrasting feature of the United States is that its growth and success rests on indiviudal responsibility, liberties and a hostile mindset to big government and tax since the revolution! [[User:Laguardia|Laguardia]]

== The entrenched Church of England ==

I wonder if part of the reason is that the officially entrenched nature of the Anglican Church has caused a complacency amongst the religious over there. In many ways the Church of England has become more of a social organisation than a religious one, and this has had a liberalizing effect on the population on the whole. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 14:43, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:Good point ... and certainly worth adding. I'll include it now, and please feel free to improve.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:01, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

== More liberal ==

Is the UK more liberal? What factors are we judging its liberalism on? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:53, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:England is certainly less [[conservative]] than the U.S.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:07, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
::I am sure that it is but I am just wondering about what factors have been taken into account. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:18, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

== The BBC ==
It's a public broadcaster, which tend to be liberal (look at NPR and PBS in the US) and furthermore, Brits have no choice in funding it, as it's paid for by mandatory TV licenses. Finally, while there is commercial (i.e. non-government TV) in Britain, the BBC is the only free (as in beer, aside from the license) option. Because of the tightly-controlled media, and lack of a free market, it's no wonder liberalism is so rampant there. --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 22:01, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

:The BBC is not the only free-to-view broadcaster by any means. Up until the advent of digital television there were five free channels, BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. There are now dozens more free-to-air channels, the vast majority of them being commercial broadcasters. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 22:37, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

::Do you deny that The BBC is the dominant media in England and that it's heavily liberally biased? --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 22:49, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
:::I will answer from my perspective of living in the UK for a year not so long ago. Yes. Liberally biased but not ''heavily'' liberally biased. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:53, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

::::FergusE, rather than turning on me for pointing out a factual error and posing a question that bears no relevance to the point I was making, you could just accept your mistake graciously. I never said it wasn't the dominant media in England. And I do not think it is even possible, or sensible to divide the world up into things which are 'conservative' and things which are 'liberal' as if the two terms are categories set in stone and used in the same way by everyone. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 08:31, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

==A Ffederal England and freedom of speech==

This is quite a slippery argument. England is a much smaller country than the United States and it's hard to see how it would be practical to devise any sort of federal structure. Of course, the United Kingdom is now, essentially, arranged along federal lines. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own assemblies or parliaments.

I don't quite understand the freedom of speech argument. What evidence is there that England is less at home to the right of free expression than is the United States?

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-03-28T16:35:06Z

Jdixon: /* No U2? */

See [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= this]. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 10:04, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

: The [[neoconservative]] ''National Review'' list is 95% garbage, not [[conservative]] at all. I only found one tune on the list that should be added ours ("Stand by your man"), and National Review had it at #50.

: The contrast here with ''National Review'' illustrates the need for ''Conservapedia''. But thanks for your link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Oops... it seems that I added a bunch of songs from that list. Several of mine (Brick, Red Barchetta, I Can't Drive 55, Sweet Home Alabama, and Revolution 1) were on there. That's interesting, though... the NR person and I thought alike on this one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:16, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sweet Home Alabama? I love that song (and I'm a liberal)! Revolution's great, too.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry? Why was my entry for The Fall's Pseud Mag Ed removed? They have always been the great deflators of liberal complacency. What is going on?

: Post a link to the lyrics of the song here and we'll see. Also, please sign your entries by using the signature button in the row above the edit box. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:16, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Can a song possibly be just a song, rather than a political statement? - BornAgainBrit

: Uh, sure, there are songs that lack any meaning at all. "I wanna hold your hand," for example, is a pleasant jingle from your homeland. I trust we'd agree that it is not the most meaningful song in the world. That tune is fun for reminiscing.

: But surely you don't deny that many songs do have political meaning. [[Liberal]] attempts to deny political bias are familiar to us and no one here is fooled. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:37, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

The deletion of Bob Dylan's song was not properly explained. Observing that people serve either the devil or the Lord is a conservative observation, and of course Bob Dylan was a born-again Christian who expressed his faith in song (but don't expect [[liberals]] to tell you that).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

:I didn't mean to step on any toes, but apathy towards devil worship doesn't seem to me like a very conservative trait. Unfortunately, the verses of the songs don't give us ''any'' meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning we can glean from the song are the four lines of the chorus, three of which are essentially the same :/ [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:06, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

::Paradise by the Dashboard light? I know its a song about having pre-marital sex, but the end is about how it screwed up his life.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

After reading this list, I've gotta ask, just how do you define a 'conservative' song?--[[User:Offeep|Offeep]] 15:27, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

: [[Conservative]] is a term that is well-understood. A "conservative song" reflects some of those values without diluting them with a [[liberal]] message.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:42, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I can't believe Okie from Muskogie isn't on here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:23, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I know this is being nitpicky, but I don't like the message of Last Kiss because it seems to suggest a works salvation, that one gets to heaven by doing good rather than accepting Jesus. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:30, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

:... and on that note, let's open up a can of [[Mountain Dew]] and get ready to [[Debate:Are we saved by faith or works?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:16, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==Last Kiss==
Somebody just put up "Last Kiss;" actually I recall when it was a hit circa 1964 many adults, parents, teachers and ministers where horrified that a song about death was considered appropriate for young people. My my, how things had changed by 1967.... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:08, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Just like 'Teen Angel,' 'Leader of the Pack,' 'Dead Man's Curve,' and 'Tell Laura I Love Her.' [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

==Possible Addition==

Ok, I have a suggestion, but I want some feedback before putting it on the page. I was listening to the radio today, and Another Brick in the Wall by Pink Floyd came on. I was thinking that the song talks about the way that public schools brainwash children and turn them into "bricks" in the wall that is liberal society. In a way, the song is pro-homeschooling, because it's teachers that need to leave the kids alone so that parents can instruct their children correctly. Maybe I'm reaching a bit here, but I wanted to see what you all thought. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:23, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

: I'm open to comments and suggestions about this, but I've never viewed the famous song "another brick in the wall" as conservative. You may be right that the song properly complains about the effect of schooling, but the song doesn't offer any conservative solution that I can see.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::"Another Brick In The Wall" is more of a neutral song. Its part of a concept album in which the main character slowly seperates himself from society. Most Pink Floyd songs are about madness, due to their original lead singer going insane. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:32, 24 November 2010 (EST)

==Love Me, I'm a Liberal==

:I'm glad the commies were thrown out
:Of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board

Hardly sounds like a Communist critique. Have you read all the lyrics of the song? [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs/lyrics/liberal.html] It's twitting liberals for their supposed concern for others, which is actually sorely lacking. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:14, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

:That song is pure sarcasm and Ochs assumes the role of a 1960s-era (Cold War era) "liberal" to attack them from the extreme left in a sarcastic way. Read the lyrics again, he is attacking the AFL-CIO for throwing out the commies. He is saying liberals aren't far left ''enough''. It's not a conservative song, it's an extreme leftist one. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 17:22, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

So there's a song on this list about breaking the law 'I can't Drive 55,' and one about obeying the law 'I fought the law.' Which is the conservative value? And the Bobby Fuller Four's version of the latter was the superior version, BTW. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:40, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

== Are these truly conservative? ==

While I understand completely some of these songs being on here, I don't really understand the why Bob Dylan, The Beatles, or Ben Folds (Five) would be on this list. These individual songs may be able to be warped into our mindset, but if one truly looks at these, they become overwhelmingly liberal.

For example: The Beatles - Revolution
While this song does indeed talk about how "Carrying pictures of Chairman Mao" will do no good, it also talks about how war and money can't solve problems. In addition, if a child is to read tis and decide to find out more about The Beatles, they will undoubtedly find some intensely liberal themes. The same idea goes for Bob Dylan. Look at any of his other songs. At the same time, Ben Folds does exactly the same thing.

I cannot argue with the songs and parts on this list, but I wonder if this is a slippery slope?
::It's possible that many of these songs were adopted by conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee playing John Cougar Mellencamp's hits. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Many of the songs here have a powerful [[conservative]] message, and demonstrate that the music industry does not have to be [[liberal]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: P.S. [[Liberals]] do say [[conservative]] things from time to time. We're listing songs here, not artists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

I would just like add that Revolution 1 was written as a reaction against the protesters against the Vietnam War who were getting violent. All Revolution is saying is for the protesters to protest, but not violently, which is still liberal, but a message than other liberal songs. However, for other Beatles songs, they range from being liberal (Why Don't We Do It in the Road?) to be being kind of conservative (Let It Be). Most however, are pretty much neutral. You usually kind Paul McCartney as being more concervative, and Lennon as liberal. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:28, 24 November 2010 (EST)

== In Your Eyes ==

Okay, the song can be considered to be about God, but that alone does not make it conservative. I think Peter Gabriel himself would object to the song's inclusion in this list. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:23, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Peter Gabriel can object all he likes. "In Your Eyes" appeals to conservative values, as in "a thousand churches." Do you think we should object when a liberal says something conservative???--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:27, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::Religion is not conservative. Fundamentalism is, but not religion. The presence of religion in a song does not make it conservative, even as adherence to religion does not make a person conservative. Look at me, I'm a Christian, but I'm also a communist. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive. One's personal merely interpersonally-social morals under religion might be more "conservative", in the loosest sense of the term — not conservative, simply somewhat more so — than they would be otherwise; however, that does not automatically make one politically conservative.--[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:50, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::: The single best predictor of how conservative someone votes is how often he attends a place of worship of God. Your argument suggesting that you are a counterexample to that correlation means nothing. See point #2 in [[liberal logic]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::That wasn't irrelevant at all. Correlation != causation. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::::Sorry, my edit summary should have been "basic statistical interpretation". --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:09, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::: Why did you cite your counterexample, if it wasn't an example of the logical fallacy #2 in [[liberal logic]]? Do you really think a counterexample disproves causation?

==Land of Confusion==
Does Genesis' ''Land of Confusion'' belong on the list? I remember the music video portraying Ronald Reagan (in puppet form) as inept, and it parodies several conservative leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, et. al. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 13:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)

: It's liberal lyric of "too many people" is enough reason to bounce it from the list. Thanks for catching this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 5 March 2009 (EST)

==Should Fortunate Son really be on this list?==

It's vehemently anti-war. Please correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's a very conservative belief. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

:I just looked the lyrics. Pretty confused stuff. I'd agree it's not conservative. Would you like to toss it from the list? Please feel free to do so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:26, 7 January 2010 (EST)

:Done. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

== Long Black Train by Josh Turner? ==

To me, this song seems like a good candidate for this list. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 07:14, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== The Decision by Ricky Van Shelton ==

I think this is another good candidate for this list. It's a song about a teenage girl who gives in to peer pressure and gets pregnant and the consequences of that action. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 09:02, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== New Agey ==

I removed the new agey phrase of "the cycle of life, death and rebirth," for the "Lightning Crashes," by Live, but feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

: That wasn't meant to seem "new agey" in the least, but I do understand what you're saying. The song presents a view of life as being cyclical, as the baby is being born an old woman dies, and "The confusion that was hers belongs now to the baby down the hall." I think the lyrics really speak to the significance of life (not just at childbirth), but as a whole. I don't think the song is necessarily about the old woman being reincarnated as the newborn child, but it definitely seems to speak of the circle of life.[[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 15:56, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

:: Perhaps a rewording would work then? How about replacing "the cycle of life, death and rebirth" with "the joy of childbirth in contrast with the end of life"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:59, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

::: I agree that a rewording would work, thank you for working with me. Perhaps we could just say that the song celebrates the significance of life from birth until death, almost in an as one door closes another opens kind of way? [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 20:00, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

== Song idea ==

"One Man, One Woman" sung by ABBA. Indirectly a tribute to traditional marriage and monogamy.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 12:14, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good by the title, so how about adding it where you think it would be appropriate in the list? Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:17, 12 January 2011 (EST)

== Takin' Care of Business ==

This song by BTO is on the list for supporting "Hard work ethic", but its not. The refrain is jokingly ironic. "I love to work at nothing all day; and I've been taking care of business"

The body of the song describes a more easy going life just making music rather than waking up early, catching trains for work, etc.

I'm not saying it makes the song liberal, and not sure why its even necessary to classify songs along political lines, but it sure as heck ain't about working hard.
I'd suggest if someone wants to keep it here because its a good song, and if people can only enjoy it because it conforms to their political views, than change the reason to "Mike Huckabee performed the song" [comment by AndrewJackson]

:You left out how the song praises the self-employed, which is a very conservative, hard-working group of people.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

== Adonai My Lord ==

I'm going to delete this song from the list, as it is from the atheistic industrial metal genre. The lyrics reflect a sort of militant Christianity that does not reflect well on the religion as a whole. For example, this group has a song called "Christf---"...obviously they are not conservative. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 01:14, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

==No U2?==

Surely -- despite the band's liberal leanings -- one of U2's unashamedly Christian songs should make it in. Gloria seems the obvious choice. The chorus, you may remember, goes: "Gloria, in te domine/ Gloria, exultate/ Gloria, Gloria/ Oh Lord, loosen my lips." --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:34, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-03-28T16:34:45Z

Jdixon: /* No U2? */

See [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= this]. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 10:04, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

: The [[neoconservative]] ''National Review'' list is 95% garbage, not [[conservative]] at all. I only found one tune on the list that should be added ours ("Stand by your man"), and National Review had it at #50.

: The contrast here with ''National Review'' illustrates the need for ''Conservapedia''. But thanks for your link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Oops... it seems that I added a bunch of songs from that list. Several of mine (Brick, Red Barchetta, I Can't Drive 55, Sweet Home Alabama, and Revolution 1) were on there. That's interesting, though... the NR person and I thought alike on this one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:16, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sweet Home Alabama? I love that song (and I'm a liberal)! Revolution's great, too.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry? Why was my entry for The Fall's Pseud Mag Ed removed? They have always been the great deflators of liberal complacency. What is going on?

: Post a link to the lyrics of the song here and we'll see. Also, please sign your entries by using the signature button in the row above the edit box. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:16, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Can a song possibly be just a song, rather than a political statement? - BornAgainBrit

: Uh, sure, there are songs that lack any meaning at all. "I wanna hold your hand," for example, is a pleasant jingle from your homeland. I trust we'd agree that it is not the most meaningful song in the world. That tune is fun for reminiscing.

: But surely you don't deny that many songs do have political meaning. [[Liberal]] attempts to deny political bias are familiar to us and no one here is fooled. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:37, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

The deletion of Bob Dylan's song was not properly explained. Observing that people serve either the devil or the Lord is a conservative observation, and of course Bob Dylan was a born-again Christian who expressed his faith in song (but don't expect [[liberals]] to tell you that).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

:I didn't mean to step on any toes, but apathy towards devil worship doesn't seem to me like a very conservative trait. Unfortunately, the verses of the songs don't give us ''any'' meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning we can glean from the song are the four lines of the chorus, three of which are essentially the same :/ [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:06, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

::Paradise by the Dashboard light? I know its a song about having pre-marital sex, but the end is about how it screwed up his life.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

After reading this list, I've gotta ask, just how do you define a 'conservative' song?--[[User:Offeep|Offeep]] 15:27, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

: [[Conservative]] is a term that is well-understood. A "conservative song" reflects some of those values without diluting them with a [[liberal]] message.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:42, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I can't believe Okie from Muskogie isn't on here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:23, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I know this is being nitpicky, but I don't like the message of Last Kiss because it seems to suggest a works salvation, that one gets to heaven by doing good rather than accepting Jesus. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:30, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

:... and on that note, let's open up a can of [[Mountain Dew]] and get ready to [[Debate:Are we saved by faith or works?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:16, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==Last Kiss==
Somebody just put up "Last Kiss;" actually I recall when it was a hit circa 1964 many adults, parents, teachers and ministers where horrified that a song about death was considered appropriate for young people. My my, how things had changed by 1967.... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:08, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Just like 'Teen Angel,' 'Leader of the Pack,' 'Dead Man's Curve,' and 'Tell Laura I Love Her.' [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

==Possible Addition==

Ok, I have a suggestion, but I want some feedback before putting it on the page. I was listening to the radio today, and Another Brick in the Wall by Pink Floyd came on. I was thinking that the song talks about the way that public schools brainwash children and turn them into "bricks" in the wall that is liberal society. In a way, the song is pro-homeschooling, because it's teachers that need to leave the kids alone so that parents can instruct their children correctly. Maybe I'm reaching a bit here, but I wanted to see what you all thought. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:23, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

: I'm open to comments and suggestions about this, but I've never viewed the famous song "another brick in the wall" as conservative. You may be right that the song properly complains about the effect of schooling, but the song doesn't offer any conservative solution that I can see.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::"Another Brick In The Wall" is more of a neutral song. Its part of a concept album in which the main character slowly seperates himself from society. Most Pink Floyd songs are about madness, due to their original lead singer going insane. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:32, 24 November 2010 (EST)

==Love Me, I'm a Liberal==

:I'm glad the commies were thrown out
:Of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board

Hardly sounds like a Communist critique. Have you read all the lyrics of the song? [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs/lyrics/liberal.html] It's twitting liberals for their supposed concern for others, which is actually sorely lacking. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:14, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

:That song is pure sarcasm and Ochs assumes the role of a 1960s-era (Cold War era) "liberal" to attack them from the extreme left in a sarcastic way. Read the lyrics again, he is attacking the AFL-CIO for throwing out the commies. He is saying liberals aren't far left ''enough''. It's not a conservative song, it's an extreme leftist one. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 17:22, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

So there's a song on this list about breaking the law 'I can't Drive 55,' and one about obeying the law 'I fought the law.' Which is the conservative value? And the Bobby Fuller Four's version of the latter was the superior version, BTW. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:40, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

== Are these truly conservative? ==

While I understand completely some of these songs being on here, I don't really understand the why Bob Dylan, The Beatles, or Ben Folds (Five) would be on this list. These individual songs may be able to be warped into our mindset, but if one truly looks at these, they become overwhelmingly liberal.

For example: The Beatles - Revolution
While this song does indeed talk about how "Carrying pictures of Chairman Mao" will do no good, it also talks about how war and money can't solve problems. In addition, if a child is to read tis and decide to find out more about The Beatles, they will undoubtedly find some intensely liberal themes. The same idea goes for Bob Dylan. Look at any of his other songs. At the same time, Ben Folds does exactly the same thing.

I cannot argue with the songs and parts on this list, but I wonder if this is a slippery slope?
::It's possible that many of these songs were adopted by conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee playing John Cougar Mellencamp's hits. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Many of the songs here have a powerful [[conservative]] message, and demonstrate that the music industry does not have to be [[liberal]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: P.S. [[Liberals]] do say [[conservative]] things from time to time. We're listing songs here, not artists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

I would just like add that Revolution 1 was written as a reaction against the protesters against the Vietnam War who were getting violent. All Revolution is saying is for the protesters to protest, but not violently, which is still liberal, but a message than other liberal songs. However, for other Beatles songs, they range from being liberal (Why Don't We Do It in the Road?) to be being kind of conservative (Let It Be). Most however, are pretty much neutral. You usually kind Paul McCartney as being more concervative, and Lennon as liberal. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:28, 24 November 2010 (EST)

== In Your Eyes ==

Okay, the song can be considered to be about God, but that alone does not make it conservative. I think Peter Gabriel himself would object to the song's inclusion in this list. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:23, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Peter Gabriel can object all he likes. "In Your Eyes" appeals to conservative values, as in "a thousand churches." Do you think we should object when a liberal says something conservative???--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:27, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::Religion is not conservative. Fundamentalism is, but not religion. The presence of religion in a song does not make it conservative, even as adherence to religion does not make a person conservative. Look at me, I'm a Christian, but I'm also a communist. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive. One's personal merely interpersonally-social morals under religion might be more "conservative", in the loosest sense of the term — not conservative, simply somewhat more so — than they would be otherwise; however, that does not automatically make one politically conservative.--[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:50, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::: The single best predictor of how conservative someone votes is how often he attends a place of worship of God. Your argument suggesting that you are a counterexample to that correlation means nothing. See point #2 in [[liberal logic]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::That wasn't irrelevant at all. Correlation != causation. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::::Sorry, my edit summary should have been "basic statistical interpretation". --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:09, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::: Why did you cite your counterexample, if it wasn't an example of the logical fallacy #2 in [[liberal logic]]? Do you really think a counterexample disproves causation?

==Land of Confusion==
Does Genesis' ''Land of Confusion'' belong on the list? I remember the music video portraying Ronald Reagan (in puppet form) as inept, and it parodies several conservative leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, et. al. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 13:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)

: It's liberal lyric of "too many people" is enough reason to bounce it from the list. Thanks for catching this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 5 March 2009 (EST)

==Should Fortunate Son really be on this list?==

It's vehemently anti-war. Please correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's a very conservative belief. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

:I just looked the lyrics. Pretty confused stuff. I'd agree it's not conservative. Would you like to toss it from the list? Please feel free to do so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:26, 7 January 2010 (EST)

:Done. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

== Long Black Train by Josh Turner? ==

To me, this song seems like a good candidate for this list. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 07:14, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== The Decision by Ricky Van Shelton ==

I think this is another good candidate for this list. It's a song about a teenage girl who gives in to peer pressure and gets pregnant and the consequences of that action. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 09:02, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== New Agey ==

I removed the new agey phrase of "the cycle of life, death and rebirth," for the "Lightning Crashes," by Live, but feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

: That wasn't meant to seem "new agey" in the least, but I do understand what you're saying. The song presents a view of life as being cyclical, as the baby is being born an old woman dies, and "The confusion that was hers belongs now to the baby down the hall." I think the lyrics really speak to the significance of life (not just at childbirth), but as a whole. I don't think the song is necessarily about the old woman being reincarnated as the newborn child, but it definitely seems to speak of the circle of life.[[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 15:56, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

:: Perhaps a rewording would work then? How about replacing "the cycle of life, death and rebirth" with "the joy of childbirth in contrast with the end of life"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:59, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

::: I agree that a rewording would work, thank you for working with me. Perhaps we could just say that the song celebrates the significance of life from birth until death, almost in an as one door closes another opens kind of way? [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 20:00, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

== Song idea ==

"One Man, One Woman" sung by ABBA. Indirectly a tribute to traditional marriage and monogamy.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 12:14, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good by the title, so how about adding it where you think it would be appropriate in the list? Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:17, 12 January 2011 (EST)

== Takin' Care of Business ==

This song by BTO is on the list for supporting "Hard work ethic", but its not. The refrain is jokingly ironic. "I love to work at nothing all day; and I've been taking care of business"

The body of the song describes a more easy going life just making music rather than waking up early, catching trains for work, etc.

I'm not saying it makes the song liberal, and not sure why its even necessary to classify songs along political lines, but it sure as heck ain't about working hard.
I'd suggest if someone wants to keep it here because its a good song, and if people can only enjoy it because it conforms to their political views, than change the reason to "Mike Huckabee performed the song" [comment by AndrewJackson]

:You left out how the song praises the self-employed, which is a very conservative, hard-working group of people.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

== Adonai My Lord ==

I'm going to delete this song from the list, as it is from the atheistic industrial metal genre. The lyrics reflect a sort of militant Christianity that does not reflect well on the religion as a whole. For example, this group has a song called "Christf---"...obviously they are not conservative. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 01:14, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

==No U2?==

Surely -- despite the band's liberal leanings -- one of U2's unashamedly Christian songs should make it in. Gloria seems the obvious choice. The chorus, you may remember, goes: "Gloria, in te domine/ "Gloria, exultate/ Gloria, Gloria/ Oh Lord, loosen my lips." --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:34, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-03-28T16:34:06Z

Jdixon:

See [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= this]. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 10:04, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

: The [[neoconservative]] ''National Review'' list is 95% garbage, not [[conservative]] at all. I only found one tune on the list that should be added ours ("Stand by your man"), and National Review had it at #50.

: The contrast here with ''National Review'' illustrates the need for ''Conservapedia''. But thanks for your link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Oops... it seems that I added a bunch of songs from that list. Several of mine (Brick, Red Barchetta, I Can't Drive 55, Sweet Home Alabama, and Revolution 1) were on there. That's interesting, though... the NR person and I thought alike on this one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:16, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sweet Home Alabama? I love that song (and I'm a liberal)! Revolution's great, too.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry? Why was my entry for The Fall's Pseud Mag Ed removed? They have always been the great deflators of liberal complacency. What is going on?

: Post a link to the lyrics of the song here and we'll see. Also, please sign your entries by using the signature button in the row above the edit box. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:16, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Can a song possibly be just a song, rather than a political statement? - BornAgainBrit

: Uh, sure, there are songs that lack any meaning at all. "I wanna hold your hand," for example, is a pleasant jingle from your homeland. I trust we'd agree that it is not the most meaningful song in the world. That tune is fun for reminiscing.

: But surely you don't deny that many songs do have political meaning. [[Liberal]] attempts to deny political bias are familiar to us and no one here is fooled. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:37, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

The deletion of Bob Dylan's song was not properly explained. Observing that people serve either the devil or the Lord is a conservative observation, and of course Bob Dylan was a born-again Christian who expressed his faith in song (but don't expect [[liberals]] to tell you that).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

:I didn't mean to step on any toes, but apathy towards devil worship doesn't seem to me like a very conservative trait. Unfortunately, the verses of the songs don't give us ''any'' meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning we can glean from the song are the four lines of the chorus, three of which are essentially the same :/ [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:06, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

::Paradise by the Dashboard light? I know its a song about having pre-marital sex, but the end is about how it screwed up his life.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

After reading this list, I've gotta ask, just how do you define a 'conservative' song?--[[User:Offeep|Offeep]] 15:27, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

: [[Conservative]] is a term that is well-understood. A "conservative song" reflects some of those values without diluting them with a [[liberal]] message.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:42, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I can't believe Okie from Muskogie isn't on here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:23, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I know this is being nitpicky, but I don't like the message of Last Kiss because it seems to suggest a works salvation, that one gets to heaven by doing good rather than accepting Jesus. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:30, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

:... and on that note, let's open up a can of [[Mountain Dew]] and get ready to [[Debate:Are we saved by faith or works?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:16, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==Last Kiss==
Somebody just put up "Last Kiss;" actually I recall when it was a hit circa 1964 many adults, parents, teachers and ministers where horrified that a song about death was considered appropriate for young people. My my, how things had changed by 1967.... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:08, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Just like 'Teen Angel,' 'Leader of the Pack,' 'Dead Man's Curve,' and 'Tell Laura I Love Her.' [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

==Possible Addition==

Ok, I have a suggestion, but I want some feedback before putting it on the page. I was listening to the radio today, and Another Brick in the Wall by Pink Floyd came on. I was thinking that the song talks about the way that public schools brainwash children and turn them into "bricks" in the wall that is liberal society. In a way, the song is pro-homeschooling, because it's teachers that need to leave the kids alone so that parents can instruct their children correctly. Maybe I'm reaching a bit here, but I wanted to see what you all thought. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:23, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

: I'm open to comments and suggestions about this, but I've never viewed the famous song "another brick in the wall" as conservative. You may be right that the song properly complains about the effect of schooling, but the song doesn't offer any conservative solution that I can see.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::"Another Brick In The Wall" is more of a neutral song. Its part of a concept album in which the main character slowly seperates himself from society. Most Pink Floyd songs are about madness, due to their original lead singer going insane. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:32, 24 November 2010 (EST)

==Love Me, I'm a Liberal==

:I'm glad the commies were thrown out
:Of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board

Hardly sounds like a Communist critique. Have you read all the lyrics of the song? [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs/lyrics/liberal.html] It's twitting liberals for their supposed concern for others, which is actually sorely lacking. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:14, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

:That song is pure sarcasm and Ochs assumes the role of a 1960s-era (Cold War era) "liberal" to attack them from the extreme left in a sarcastic way. Read the lyrics again, he is attacking the AFL-CIO for throwing out the commies. He is saying liberals aren't far left ''enough''. It's not a conservative song, it's an extreme leftist one. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 17:22, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

So there's a song on this list about breaking the law 'I can't Drive 55,' and one about obeying the law 'I fought the law.' Which is the conservative value? And the Bobby Fuller Four's version of the latter was the superior version, BTW. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:40, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

== Are these truly conservative? ==

While I understand completely some of these songs being on here, I don't really understand the why Bob Dylan, The Beatles, or Ben Folds (Five) would be on this list. These individual songs may be able to be warped into our mindset, but if one truly looks at these, they become overwhelmingly liberal.

For example: The Beatles - Revolution
While this song does indeed talk about how "Carrying pictures of Chairman Mao" will do no good, it also talks about how war and money can't solve problems. In addition, if a child is to read tis and decide to find out more about The Beatles, they will undoubtedly find some intensely liberal themes. The same idea goes for Bob Dylan. Look at any of his other songs. At the same time, Ben Folds does exactly the same thing.

I cannot argue with the songs and parts on this list, but I wonder if this is a slippery slope?
::It's possible that many of these songs were adopted by conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee playing John Cougar Mellencamp's hits. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Many of the songs here have a powerful [[conservative]] message, and demonstrate that the music industry does not have to be [[liberal]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: P.S. [[Liberals]] do say [[conservative]] things from time to time. We're listing songs here, not artists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

I would just like add that Revolution 1 was written as a reaction against the protesters against the Vietnam War who were getting violent. All Revolution is saying is for the protesters to protest, but not violently, which is still liberal, but a message than other liberal songs. However, for other Beatles songs, they range from being liberal (Why Don't We Do It in the Road?) to be being kind of conservative (Let It Be). Most however, are pretty much neutral. You usually kind Paul McCartney as being more concervative, and Lennon as liberal. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:28, 24 November 2010 (EST)

== In Your Eyes ==

Okay, the song can be considered to be about God, but that alone does not make it conservative. I think Peter Gabriel himself would object to the song's inclusion in this list. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:23, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Peter Gabriel can object all he likes. "In Your Eyes" appeals to conservative values, as in "a thousand churches." Do you think we should object when a liberal says something conservative???--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:27, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::Religion is not conservative. Fundamentalism is, but not religion. The presence of religion in a song does not make it conservative, even as adherence to religion does not make a person conservative. Look at me, I'm a Christian, but I'm also a communist. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive. One's personal merely interpersonally-social morals under religion might be more "conservative", in the loosest sense of the term — not conservative, simply somewhat more so — than they would be otherwise; however, that does not automatically make one politically conservative.--[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:50, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::: The single best predictor of how conservative someone votes is how often he attends a place of worship of God. Your argument suggesting that you are a counterexample to that correlation means nothing. See point #2 in [[liberal logic]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::That wasn't irrelevant at all. Correlation != causation. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::::Sorry, my edit summary should have been "basic statistical interpretation". --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:09, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::: Why did you cite your counterexample, if it wasn't an example of the logical fallacy #2 in [[liberal logic]]? Do you really think a counterexample disproves causation?

==Land of Confusion==
Does Genesis' ''Land of Confusion'' belong on the list? I remember the music video portraying Ronald Reagan (in puppet form) as inept, and it parodies several conservative leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, et. al. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 13:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)

: It's liberal lyric of "too many people" is enough reason to bounce it from the list. Thanks for catching this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 5 March 2009 (EST)

==Should Fortunate Son really be on this list?==

It's vehemently anti-war. Please correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's a very conservative belief. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

:I just looked the lyrics. Pretty confused stuff. I'd agree it's not conservative. Would you like to toss it from the list? Please feel free to do so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:26, 7 January 2010 (EST)

:Done. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

== Long Black Train by Josh Turner? ==

To me, this song seems like a good candidate for this list. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 07:14, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== The Decision by Ricky Van Shelton ==

I think this is another good candidate for this list. It's a song about a teenage girl who gives in to peer pressure and gets pregnant and the consequences of that action. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 09:02, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== New Agey ==

I removed the new agey phrase of "the cycle of life, death and rebirth," for the "Lightning Crashes," by Live, but feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

: That wasn't meant to seem "new agey" in the least, but I do understand what you're saying. The song presents a view of life as being cyclical, as the baby is being born an old woman dies, and "The confusion that was hers belongs now to the baby down the hall." I think the lyrics really speak to the significance of life (not just at childbirth), but as a whole. I don't think the song is necessarily about the old woman being reincarnated as the newborn child, but it definitely seems to speak of the circle of life.[[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 15:56, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

:: Perhaps a rewording would work then? How about replacing "the cycle of life, death and rebirth" with "the joy of childbirth in contrast with the end of life"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:59, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

::: I agree that a rewording would work, thank you for working with me. Perhaps we could just say that the song celebrates the significance of life from birth until death, almost in an as one door closes another opens kind of way? [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 20:00, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

== Song idea ==

"One Man, One Woman" sung by ABBA. Indirectly a tribute to traditional marriage and monogamy.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 12:14, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good by the title, so how about adding it where you think it would be appropriate in the list? Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:17, 12 January 2011 (EST)

== Takin' Care of Business ==

This song by BTO is on the list for supporting "Hard work ethic", but its not. The refrain is jokingly ironic. "I love to work at nothing all day; and I've been taking care of business"

The body of the song describes a more easy going life just making music rather than waking up early, catching trains for work, etc.

I'm not saying it makes the song liberal, and not sure why its even necessary to classify songs along political lines, but it sure as heck ain't about working hard.
I'd suggest if someone wants to keep it here because its a good song, and if people can only enjoy it because it conforms to their political views, than change the reason to "Mike Huckabee performed the song" [comment by AndrewJackson]

:You left out how the song praises the self-employed, which is a very conservative, hard-working group of people.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

== Adonai My Lord ==

I'm going to delete this song from the list, as it is from the atheistic industrial metal genre. The lyrics reflect a sort of militant Christianity that does not reflect well on the religion as a whole. For example, this group has a song called "Christf---"...obviously they are not conservative. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 01:14, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

==No U2?==

Surely -- despite the band's liberal leanings -- one of U2's unashamedly Christian songs should make it in. Gloria seems the obvious choice. The chorus, you may remember, goes: Gloria, in te domine/ "Gloria, exultate/ Gloria, Gloria/ Oh Lord, loosen my lips." --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:34, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-02-22T18:15:07Z

Jdixon:

I'd like to organize these into categories - not divided up, maybe - with secularized expressions at the top (e.g., Thank God => thank goodness). Terms indicating a total shift of concept like Bible Study => fundamentalism might come later. Everyone okay with this? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good to me! How about giving it a try and let's see how it looks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::To be fair, many more conservative Christians (my mother, for example), use some of the so-called "secular expressions" because they take a strict line on taking the Lord's name in vain. She would, for example, rather not say "Thank God" unless she was quite literally thanking the deity. Indeed, I believe that is how the "thank goodness" construction originally evolved. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-02-22T17:57:24Z

Jdixon:

I'd like to organize these into categories - not divided up, maybe - with secularized expressions at the top (e.g., Thank God => thank goodness). Terms indicating a total shift of concept like Bible Study => fundamentalism might come later. Everyone okay with this? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good to me! How about giving it a try and let's see how it looks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::To be fair, many more conservative Christians (my mother, for example), use the some of the so- called "secular expressions" because they take a strict line on taking the Lord's name in vain. She would, for example, rather not say "Thank God" unless she was quite literally thanking the deity. Indeed, I believe that is how the "thank goodness" construction originally evolved. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2010-11-29T01:47:56Z

Jdixon: /* The Lives of Others */

[[Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies/archive1|Archive 1]]
 [[Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies/archive2|Archive 2]]

== Public Discussion Here ==

(post comments here by clicking "Edit this page")

== Brokeback Mountain ==

I was thinking about this topic earlier and had an interesting thought about a seemingly non-conservative movie that, in a way, is actually quite so. I'm going to throw this out there for some (hopefully productive and civil) debate and see what people think.

The movie is Brokeback Mountain. Now hold on to your outrage, people. I have justifications for my point. Please hear me out. (Oh, and spoilers, just in case you planned to see/read it and hadn't)

As you probably know, the movie (and the novella on which its based) is about two men who fall into a homosexual lifestyle. But what struck me as conservative about this film is that it doesn't glorify the lifestyle; the two mens' choice to indulge in homosexuality is a disastrous choice that ends up ruining both their lives. One man's marriage is destroyed and his relationship with his child is forever tainted. The other man's choice actually leads to his violent death (Incidentally, I'm not saying that killing someone for being gay is a conservative value. But the point is that this movie is actually very up-front about acknowledging the catastrophic consequences of a homosexual lifestyle).

Considering all that, my next though was whether this movie might be unintentionally conservative, in which case it certainly doesn't belong on this list. But I don't think it is (haven't seen it since it first came out though, so I could be wrong).

So, there's my point. I would appreciate some discussion. I imagine some CPers will think I'm trolling or just trying to start an argument. Not so. I feel like it's a valid point but that there are probably strong arguments for and against, and I'd really like to hear what other people think. [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 17:11, 25 June 2010 (EDT)

== U-571 ==

I deleted U-571 from this list. It portrays the capture of an Enigma machine from a German U-boat by US forces. As pretty much everyone with any interest in WW2 knows, the naval Enigma machine was stolen by Polish forces and decoded by British code-breakers at Bletchley. My Brit friends think U-571 is a joke because it minimises the role of the British ("you arrogant Yankees"). Poles are offended because it cuts out the Polish involvement altogether - including the very brave men who risked their lives to steal an Enigma machine and hand it over to British Intelligence. (BTW, Britain and Poland were allies of ours in WW2 and still are now.) Deceit isn't a conservative virtue - so I crossed U-571 off the list. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 16:51, 20 September 2010 (EDT)

: I'd say it's very questionable whether there's any deceit involved. The movie makes an on-screen written acknowledgment that the the first (and the majority) of enigmas were captured by British sailors. The whole movie is so over-the-top that nobody with a lick of intelligence would believe it's true. American sailors did capture an enigma machine during the war too, so this movie is obviously "inspired by a true story" even if it's not especially true. Most of the movie-going public knows that Hollywood "true" stories are highly fictionalized. [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:13, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

==The Lives of Others==

Where on earth is The Lives of Others? it is, surely, the best recent critique of Communism and, for that matter, one of the best films ''of any type'' released in the past five years. It certainly deserves a place ahead of, for example, the obscure Dark Matter. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:13, 28 November 2010 (EST)

: It's in German, right, and about the former [[East Germany]]? I'll add it on your recommendation, but I can't agree it ranks higher than the English-language Dark Matter, which speaks to today and not just the past.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:41, 28 November 2010 (EST)

::Fair enough, Andy. Though I don't quite understand the argument against foreign-language films. If the issue is obscurity, The Lives of Others was seen by far more people in the US than Dark Matter. A glance at Box-Office Mojo confirms that Dark Matter took in a staggeringly tiny $30,591 on its domestic run. The Lives of Others took in $11,286,112 in the US (plus another $66 million in the rest of the world). I am, however, content to abide by your criteria. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 15:40, 28 November 2010 (EST)

:::Oprah Winfrey's daytime talk show rakes in far higher revenues than both, but I'm not sure what that proves. Dark Matter was apparently victimized and downplayed by liberals who finally figured out its conservative message, after it won first place in one of the Sundance Film Festival categories. The liberal backlash against Dark Matter is particularly surprising given that Meryl Streep starred in it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:48, 28 November 2010 (EST)

::::P.S. Your suggestion of "The Lives of Others" is a fine addition. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:02, 28 November 2010 (EST)

::::No problem. Keep up the good work. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 20:47, 28 November 2010 (EST)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2010-11-28T20:43:33Z

Jdixon: /* The Lives of Others */

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2010-11-28T20:40:38Z

Jdixon: /* The Lives of Others */

[[Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies/archive1|Archive 1]]
 [[Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies/archive2|Archive 2]]

== Public Discussion Here ==

(post comments here by clicking "Edit this page")

== Brokeback Mountain ==

I was thinking about this topic earlier and had an interesting thought about a seemingly non-conservative movie that, in a way, is actually quite so. I'm going to throw this out there for some (hopefully productive and civil) debate and see what people think.

The movie is Brokeback Mountain. Now hold on to your outrage, people. I have justifications for my point. Please hear me out. (Oh, and spoilers, just in case you planned to see/read it and hadn't)

As you probably know, the movie (and the novella on which its based) is about two men who fall into a homosexual lifestyle. But what struck me as conservative about this film is that it doesn't glorify the lifestyle; the two mens' choice to indulge in homosexuality is a disastrous choice that ends up ruining both their lives. One man's marriage is destroyed and his relationship with his child is forever tainted. The other man's choice actually leads to his violent death (Incidentally, I'm not saying that killing someone for being gay is a conservative value. But the point is that this movie is actually very up-front about acknowledging the catastrophic consequences of a homosexual lifestyle).

Considering all that, my next though was whether this movie might be unintentionally conservative, in which case it certainly doesn't belong on this list. But I don't think it is (haven't seen it since it first came out though, so I could be wrong).

So, there's my point. I would appreciate some discussion. I imagine some CPers will think I'm trolling or just trying to start an argument. Not so. I feel like it's a valid point but that there are probably strong arguments for and against, and I'd really like to hear what other people think. [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 17:11, 25 June 2010 (EDT)

== U-571 ==

I deleted U-571 from this list. It portrays the capture of an Enigma machine from a German U-boat by US forces. As pretty much everyone with any interest in WW2 knows, the naval Enigma machine was stolen by Polish forces and decoded by British code-breakers at Bletchley. My Brit friends think U-571 is a joke because it minimises the role of the British ("you arrogant Yankees"). Poles are offended because it cuts out the Polish involvement altogether - including the very brave men who risked their lives to steal an Enigma machine and hand it over to British Intelligence. (BTW, Britain and Poland were allies of ours in WW2 and still are now.) Deceit isn't a conservative virtue - so I crossed U-571 off the list. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 16:51, 20 September 2010 (EDT)

: I'd say it's very questionable whether there's any deceit involved. The movie makes an on-screen written acknowledgment that the the first (and the majority) of enigmas were captured by British sailors. The whole movie is so over-the-top that nobody with a lick of intelligence would believe it's true. American sailors did capture an enigma machine during the war too, so this movie is obviously "inspired by a true story" even if it's not especially true. Most of the movie-going public knows that Hollywood "true" stories are highly fictionalized. [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:13, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

==The Lives of Others==

Where on earth is The Lives of Others? it is, surely, the best recent critique of Communism and, for that matter, one of the best films ''of any type'' released in the past five years. It certainly deserves a place ahead of, for example, the obscure Dark Matter. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:13, 28 November 2010 (EST)

: It's in German, right, and about the former [[East Germany]]? I'll add it on your recommendation, but I can't agree it ranks higher than the English-language Dark Matter, which speaks to today and not just the past.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:41, 28 November 2010 (EST)

::Fair enough, Andy. Though I don't quite understand the argument against foreign-language films. If the issue is obscurity, The Lives Others was seen by far more people in the US than Dark Matter. A glance at Box-Office Mojo confirms that Dark Matter took in a staggeringly tiny $30,591 on its domestic run. The Lives of Others took in $11,286,112 in the US (plus another $66 million in the rest of the world). I am, however, content to abide by your criteria. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 15:40, 28 November 2010 (EST)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies

2010-11-28T17:13:35Z

Jdixon:

Flann O'Brien

2010-11-24T21:51:51Z

Jdixon:

Flann O'Brien (5 October 1911 – 1 April 1966) was an Irish humorist, novelist and newspaper columnist. Christened Brian O'Nolan, the author was raised in County Tyrone and worked for many years as a Civil Servant. He wrote a greatly admired column in The Irish Times entitled Crushkeen Lawn in which he poked fun at the emerging nation's pettifoggery and small mindedness. He remains best known for his two great novels The Third Policeman, a surreal story set in an alternate universe, and At Swim Two Birds, an experimental work that reads like a zanier version of James Joyce's Ulysses.

{{DEFAULTSORT:O'Brien, Flann}}
[[Category:Novelists]]

Flann O'Brien

2010-11-24T21:51:24Z

Jdixon:

Flann O'Brien (5 October 1911 – 1 April 1966) was an Irish humorist, novelist and newspaper columnist. Christened Brian O'Nolan, the author was raised in County Tyrone and worked for many years as a Civil Servant. He wrote a greatly admired column in The Irish Times entitled Crushkeen Lawn in which he poked fun at the emerging nation's pettifoggery and small mindedness. He remains best known for his two great novels The Third Policeman, a surreal story set in an alternate universe, and At Swim Two Birds, an experimental work that reads like a zanier version of James Joyce's Ulysses.

{[DEFAULTSORT:O'Brien, Flann}}
[[Category:Novelists]]

Flann O'Brien

2010-11-24T21:50:35Z

Jdixon: Created page with "Flann O'Brien (5 October 1911 – 1 April 1966) was an Irish humorist, novelist and newspaper columnist. Christened Brian O'Nolan, the author was raised in County Tyrone and wo..."

Flann O'Brien (5 October 1911 – 1 April 1966) was an Irish humorist, novelist and newspaper columnist. Christened Brian O'Nolan, the author was raised in County Tyrone and worked for many years as a Civil Servant. He wrote a greatly admired column in The Irish Times entitled Crushkeen Lawn in which he poked fun at the emerging nation's pettifoggery and small mindedness. He remains best known for his two great novels The Third Policeman, a surreal story set in an alternate universe, and At Swim Two Birds, an experimental work that reads like a zanier version of James Joyce's Ulysses.

{DEFAULTSORT:O'Brien, Flann}}
[[Category:Novelists]]

User talk:Tzoran

2010-08-02T13:51:36Z

Jdixon: /* Grammatical error */

==Copy Edits==
Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Exaggeration_of_global_warming&curid=98220&diff=734588&oldid=734560&rcid=806642 improving the wording] of my new article. Please carry on! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:22, 18 December 2009 (EST)

[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=GNU/Linux&curid=8501&diff=734603&oldid=687492&rcid=806659 Really good copy-edits] on [[GNU/Linux]]. The article is more readable, thanks to you. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:44, 18 December 2009 (EST)

==Blackwater==

Are you okay with what I did to [[Xe Services LLC]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:43, 18 December 2009 (EST)

== Diego Rivera ==

Sorry, display is also an art. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:05, 15 February 2010 (EST)

: Italics are needed in those words because it is a "copy" from another site. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:11, 15 February 2010 (EST)

== Serious site ==

In response to your question, Tzoran, we have fun here, but we're a serious site that tries to help people. We teach and learn here. Anything else is a distraction that means less learning and less assistance to others.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:04, 18 February 2010 (EST)

:But what I really want to know is whether a C-coding YEC can be friends with a Java-coding OEC? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:34, 21 March 2010 (EDT)
::I actually code in [[Python]], [[Java]], [[C plus plus|C++]], and [[Fortran]] as well, but I haven't had the time to create userboxes for "This user is a <language> coder" yet, so I'm stuck with C (which I mostly only use for coding additional Python modules. If I need machine-level functionality for toolchains and the like, I prefer the power of C++). I do prefer [[Python]] to [[Java]] but I'll try to resist any Parthian shots of "Python is better!" [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] 17:44, 21 March 2010 (EDT)

== Arnold Schwarznegger ==

Good catch on that. It really did read as if it were the first '''ever''' election in U.S. history! -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 14:53, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

== Congratulations ==

Congratulations on your promotion! You can now block others, and you also have expanded editing privileges.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:48, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

==Flags and such==
Here's the "been to" display I have:
==Been to:==
{| class="wikitable"
|-bgcolor=#cccccc
|- valign="center"
| [[Image:Flag of Germany.JPG|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Brazil.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Argentina.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Greece.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Canada.svg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of France.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Panama.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Israel.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Peru.svg|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Colombia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Mexico.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Egypt.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Chile.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Ecuador.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Morocco.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Japan.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Spain.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Portugal.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Tunisia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Italyflag.gif|50px]]|| [[Image:Flag of the Philippines.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Djibouti.jpg|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Bahrain.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Venezuela.jpg|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of the Bahamas.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Turkeyflag.gif|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Gibraltar.png|50px]]||[[Image:Old Flag of Hong Kong.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the British Indian Ocean Territory.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the UAE.png|50px]]||
|-
|
|}
Trim as needed for your own display. As to switching military services, make sure that no matter what service you choose, finish your ROTC education. But I'm biased towards the Navy, so you better pick that! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:39, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking tip ==

Great blocks. Note that, in order to permit account recreation under a different name from the same IP, '''both''' options in the block function must be unchecked. In your two blocks this morning, your settings were probably appropriate anyway in light of the inappropriate names used.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:28, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

: Why are you blocking so many accounts? I've temporarily taken away your blocking privileges until this is discussed. An unused account does not merit blockage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:49, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Nice block! ==

Nice block!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:06, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Latest Block ==

T, don't worry about wrong blocks, especially if you corrected yourself. Just to let you know that blocking yourself is against our Commandments. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:31, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

==Windows registry==

Ready for merge. Thanks for your hard work. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:33, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

== Re: "Canada Newspapers" category ==

Whoops. Looks like I've made a glaringly obvious mistake. Didn't notice it at first - I'm quite tired at the moment, and isn't really thinking straight. You're right, that needs to be fixed. Thanks. [[User:JonB|JonB]] 12:33, 2 July 2010 (EDT)

== Great block again! ==

Great block again!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:43, 3 July 2010 (EDT)

== Superb edit ==

Superb edit to [[continents]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:06, 6 July 2010 (EDT)
:Thank you! [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 11:12, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking ==

Tyler, the block of RonLar seems overzealous to me, unless I'm missing something. We allow criticism on talk pages and I plan to respond to him. We welcome liberals as long as they do not violate basic common-sense rules as outlined in [[Conservapedia Commandments]]. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:17, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

==I'm a bird brain==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cormorant&curid=21805&diff=799074&oldid=799072&rcid=880195 pointing out this] ... I had thought a cormorant was a kind of [[raisin]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:01, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:I'd never heard of it, but I thought I'd copy edit it as long as I was hitting random page a bunch of times. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 14:17, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

::Better keep away from that [[Special:Random|Random page]] button (unless you want the quality of our articles to go up. ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:54, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:::You worried me there for a second! I watch the recent changes page in another tab, to check for vandalism, so all I saw at first was "Stop !!!" in the edit summary. As far as improvements go, one of these days I'll get a script going that'll fix reference errors, typos, etc. That'll be nice. Haha key words here being "one of these days" when I have the time. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 15:04, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

== Your welcome ==

You are very welcome. Godspeed. [[User:Jwilhem|Jwilhem]] 12:24, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==False arguments based on slippery wording==

We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". This is like the distinction between real [[air pollution]] and things like "emitting gases which liberals say will cause enhanced global warming".

The destruction of distinctions is one of the tactics of liberals and totalitarians, as noted in George Orwell's ''[[1984]]'' - with the aim to reduce all human speech to nothing more significant than animal noises (see [[duckspeak]]).

We can also see it in the drive for [[homosexual marriage]], as if it made '''any''' sense to speak of a pair of men (or women) as a "married" couple.

In terms of classical logic, the argument goes like this:
#Torture is so bad that it should always be against the law.
#P is torture.
#Therefore, P should be against the law.

Liberals and other enemies of US security (and the security of our allies and friends) don't care whether anyone is being tortured. They only want America's enemies to win. So they try to ban things that we need in our fight against them.

If they really cared about torture, they would shout to the high heavens about what Saddam did to political prisoners, or what China is still doing to the [[Falun Gong]]. When was the last time you heard or saw anything about THAT in the mainstream media?

Whenever there's a [[double standard]], you can always find that what they really want is different from what they say. That's why no one really trusts the liberals. They only use people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:20, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:While I agree with your point, I guess I'm confused as to what brought your comment on? Is this related to one of my edits? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 19:45, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::[[Walling]] ... sorry, I guess I went on a bit of a tangent there, didn't I? You know, one idea sparking another. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:43, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:::Not a problem at all. Like I said, I heartily agree, I just wasn't sure if one of my numerous copy edits had done the same. I added a cite to the walling article, I think, but I think that's still good. "We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". I ''definitely'' have to agree on that one. Maybe I'm wrong in this, given that I see no problem with "enhanced interrogation" as I hear it called now (I mean come on, at summer camp we'd see who could hold our breath the longest in the deep end of the pool, and we never complained that it "simulated drowning") but I think that the distinction you mentioned probably gets washed away too much, wouldn't you say? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:40, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
::::'''Note:''' So in hindsight, maybe "washed away" in reference to water boarding was a really awful, albeit accidental, pun... :P Maybe the distinctions get "glossed over?" Yeah something like that. Washed away: right meaning, but probably poor word choice. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:42, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==Grammatical error==

I know this sounds obsessive, but the constant misuse of the word cliché on the internet drives me crazy. Cliché is not an adjective; it is a noun. "It sounds cliche but sue me" should be "It sounds clichéd but sue me". I don't know where this notion that cliché is an adjective came from, but it is now ''everywhere'' on the web. Pardon my lunacy. I'll go and lie down now. [[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 14:49, 02 August 2010 (BST)

User talk:Tzoran

2010-08-02T13:50:39Z

Jdixon: /* Grammatical error */

==Copy Edits==
Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Exaggeration_of_global_warming&curid=98220&diff=734588&oldid=734560&rcid=806642 improving the wording] of my new article. Please carry on! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:22, 18 December 2009 (EST)

[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=GNU/Linux&curid=8501&diff=734603&oldid=687492&rcid=806659 Really good copy-edits] on [[GNU/Linux]]. The article is more readable, thanks to you. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:44, 18 December 2009 (EST)

==Blackwater==

Are you okay with what I did to [[Xe Services LLC]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:43, 18 December 2009 (EST)

== Diego Rivera ==

Sorry, display is also an art. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:05, 15 February 2010 (EST)

: Italics are needed in those words because it is a "copy" from another site. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:11, 15 February 2010 (EST)

== Serious site ==

In response to your question, Tzoran, we have fun here, but we're a serious site that tries to help people. We teach and learn here. Anything else is a distraction that means less learning and less assistance to others.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:04, 18 February 2010 (EST)

:But what I really want to know is whether a C-coding YEC can be friends with a Java-coding OEC? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:34, 21 March 2010 (EDT)
::I actually code in [[Python]], [[Java]], [[C plus plus|C++]], and [[Fortran]] as well, but I haven't had the time to create userboxes for "This user is a <language> coder" yet, so I'm stuck with C (which I mostly only use for coding additional Python modules. If I need machine-level functionality for toolchains and the like, I prefer the power of C++). I do prefer [[Python]] to [[Java]] but I'll try to resist any Parthian shots of "Python is better!" [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] 17:44, 21 March 2010 (EDT)

== Arnold Schwarznegger ==

Good catch on that. It really did read as if it were the first '''ever''' election in U.S. history! -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 14:53, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

== Congratulations ==

Congratulations on your promotion! You can now block others, and you also have expanded editing privileges.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:48, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

==Flags and such==
Here's the "been to" display I have:
==Been to:==
{| class="wikitable"
|-bgcolor=#cccccc
|- valign="center"
| [[Image:Flag of Germany.JPG|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Brazil.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Argentina.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Greece.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Canada.svg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of France.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Panama.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Israel.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Peru.svg|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Colombia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Mexico.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Egypt.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Chile.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Ecuador.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Morocco.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Japan.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Spain.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Portugal.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Tunisia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Italyflag.gif|50px]]|| [[Image:Flag of the Philippines.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Djibouti.jpg|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Bahrain.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Venezuela.jpg|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of the Bahamas.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Turkeyflag.gif|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Gibraltar.png|50px]]||[[Image:Old Flag of Hong Kong.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the British Indian Ocean Territory.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the UAE.png|50px]]||
|-
|
|}
Trim as needed for your own display. As to switching military services, make sure that no matter what service you choose, finish your ROTC education. But I'm biased towards the Navy, so you better pick that! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:39, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking tip ==

Great blocks. Note that, in order to permit account recreation under a different name from the same IP, '''both''' options in the block function must be unchecked. In your two blocks this morning, your settings were probably appropriate anyway in light of the inappropriate names used.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:28, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

: Why are you blocking so many accounts? I've temporarily taken away your blocking privileges until this is discussed. An unused account does not merit blockage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:49, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Nice block! ==

Nice block!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:06, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Latest Block ==

T, don't worry about wrong blocks, especially if you corrected yourself. Just to let you know that blocking yourself is against our Commandments. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:31, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

==Windows registry==

Ready for merge. Thanks for your hard work. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:33, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

== Re: "Canada Newspapers" category ==

Whoops. Looks like I've made a glaringly obvious mistake. Didn't notice it at first - I'm quite tired at the moment, and isn't really thinking straight. You're right, that needs to be fixed. Thanks. [[User:JonB|JonB]] 12:33, 2 July 2010 (EDT)

== Great block again! ==

Great block again!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:43, 3 July 2010 (EDT)

== Superb edit ==

Superb edit to [[continents]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:06, 6 July 2010 (EDT)
:Thank you! [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 11:12, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking ==

Tyler, the block of RonLar seems overzealous to me, unless I'm missing something. We allow criticism on talk pages and I plan to respond to him. We welcome liberals as long as they do not violate basic common-sense rules as outlined in [[Conservapedia Commandments]]. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:17, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

==I'm a bird brain==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cormorant&curid=21805&diff=799074&oldid=799072&rcid=880195 pointing out this] ... I had thought a cormorant was a kind of [[raisin]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:01, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:I'd never heard of it, but I thought I'd copy edit it as long as I was hitting random page a bunch of times. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 14:17, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

::Better keep away from that [[Special:Random|Random page]] button (unless you want the quality of our articles to go up. ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:54, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:::You worried me there for a second! I watch the recent changes page in another tab, to check for vandalism, so all I saw at first was "Stop !!!" in the edit summary. As far as improvements go, one of these days I'll get a script going that'll fix reference errors, typos, etc. That'll be nice. Haha key words here being "one of these days" when I have the time. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 15:04, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

== Your welcome ==

You are very welcome. Godspeed. [[User:Jwilhem|Jwilhem]] 12:24, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==False arguments based on slippery wording==

We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". This is like the distinction between real [[air pollution]] and things like "emitting gases which liberals say will cause enhanced global warming".

The destruction of distinctions is one of the tactics of liberals and totalitarians, as noted in George Orwell's ''[[1984]]'' - with the aim to reduce all human speech to nothing more significant than animal noises (see [[duckspeak]]).

We can also see it in the drive for [[homosexual marriage]], as if it made '''any''' sense to speak of a pair of men (or women) as a "married" couple.

In terms of classical logic, the argument goes like this:
#Torture is so bad that it should always be against the law.
#P is torture.
#Therefore, P should be against the law.

Liberals and other enemies of US security (and the security of our allies and friends) don't care whether anyone is being tortured. They only want America's enemies to win. So they try to ban things that we need in our fight against them.

If they really cared about torture, they would shout to the high heavens about what Saddam did to political prisoners, or what China is still doing to the [[Falun Gong]]. When was the last time you heard or saw anything about THAT in the mainstream media?

Whenever there's a [[double standard]], you can always find that what they really want is different from what they say. That's why no one really trusts the liberals. They only use people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:20, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:While I agree with your point, I guess I'm confused as to what brought your comment on? Is this related to one of my edits? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 19:45, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::[[Walling]] ... sorry, I guess I went on a bit of a tangent there, didn't I? You know, one idea sparking another. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:43, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:::Not a problem at all. Like I said, I heartily agree, I just wasn't sure if one of my numerous copy edits had done the same. I added a cite to the walling article, I think, but I think that's still good. "We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". I ''definitely'' have to agree on that one. Maybe I'm wrong in this, given that I see no problem with "enhanced interrogation" as I hear it called now (I mean come on, at summer camp we'd see who could hold our breath the longest in the deep end of the pool, and we never complained that it "simulated drowning") but I think that the distinction you mentioned probably gets washed away too much, wouldn't you say? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:40, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
::::'''Note:''' So in hindsight, maybe "washed away" in reference to water boarding was a really awful, albeit accidental, pun... :P Maybe the distinctions get "glossed over?" Yeah something like that. Washed away: right meaning, but probably poor word choice. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:42, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==Grammatical error==

I know this sounds obsessive, but the constant misuse of the word "cliché" on the internet drives me crazy. Cliché is not an adjective; it is a noun. "It sounds cliche but sue me" should be "It sounds clichéd but sue me". I don't know where this notion that cliché is an adjective came from, but it is now ''everywhere'' on the web. Pardon my lunacy. I'll go and lie down now. [[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 14:49, 02 August 2010 (BST)

User talk:Tzoran

2010-08-02T13:49:24Z

Jdixon:

==Copy Edits==
Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Exaggeration_of_global_warming&curid=98220&diff=734588&oldid=734560&rcid=806642 improving the wording] of my new article. Please carry on! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:22, 18 December 2009 (EST)

[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=GNU/Linux&curid=8501&diff=734603&oldid=687492&rcid=806659 Really good copy-edits] on [[GNU/Linux]]. The article is more readable, thanks to you. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:44, 18 December 2009 (EST)

==Blackwater==

Are you okay with what I did to [[Xe Services LLC]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:43, 18 December 2009 (EST)

== Diego Rivera ==

Sorry, display is also an art. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:05, 15 February 2010 (EST)

: Italics are needed in those words because it is a "copy" from another site. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 11:11, 15 February 2010 (EST)

== Serious site ==

In response to your question, Tzoran, we have fun here, but we're a serious site that tries to help people. We teach and learn here. Anything else is a distraction that means less learning and less assistance to others.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:04, 18 February 2010 (EST)

:But what I really want to know is whether a C-coding YEC can be friends with a Java-coding OEC? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:34, 21 March 2010 (EDT)
::I actually code in [[Python]], [[Java]], [[C plus plus|C++]], and [[Fortran]] as well, but I haven't had the time to create userboxes for "This user is a <language> coder" yet, so I'm stuck with C (which I mostly only use for coding additional Python modules. If I need machine-level functionality for toolchains and the like, I prefer the power of C++). I do prefer [[Python]] to [[Java]] but I'll try to resist any Parthian shots of "Python is better!" [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] 17:44, 21 March 2010 (EDT)

== Arnold Schwarznegger ==

Good catch on that. It really did read as if it were the first '''ever''' election in U.S. history! -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 14:53, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

== Congratulations ==

Congratulations on your promotion! You can now block others, and you also have expanded editing privileges.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:48, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

==Flags and such==
Here's the "been to" display I have:
==Been to:==
{| class="wikitable"
|-bgcolor=#cccccc
|- valign="center"
| [[Image:Flag of Germany.JPG|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Brazil.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Argentina.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Greece.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Canada.svg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of France.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Panama.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Israel.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Peru.svg|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Colombia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Mexico.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Egypt.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Chile.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Ecuador.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Morocco.png|50px]] || [[Image:Flag of Japan.png|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of Spain.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Portugal.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Tunisia.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Italyflag.gif|50px]]|| [[Image:Flag of the Philippines.png|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Djibouti.jpg|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Bahrain.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Flag of Venezuela.jpg|50px]]
|-
| [[Image:Flag of the Bahamas.jpg|50px]] ||[[Image:Turkeyflag.gif|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of Gibraltar.png|50px]]||[[Image:Old Flag of Hong Kong.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the British Indian Ocean Territory.png|50px]]||[[Image:Flag of the UAE.png|50px]]||
|-
|
|}
Trim as needed for your own display. As to switching military services, make sure that no matter what service you choose, finish your ROTC education. But I'm biased towards the Navy, so you better pick that! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:39, 28 June 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking tip ==

Great blocks. Note that, in order to permit account recreation under a different name from the same IP, '''both''' options in the block function must be unchecked. In your two blocks this morning, your settings were probably appropriate anyway in light of the inappropriate names used.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:28, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

: Why are you blocking so many accounts? I've temporarily taken away your blocking privileges until this is discussed. An unused account does not merit blockage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:49, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Nice block! ==

Nice block!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:06, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

== Latest Block ==

T, don't worry about wrong blocks, especially if you corrected yourself. Just to let you know that blocking yourself is against our Commandments. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:31, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

==Windows registry==

Ready for merge. Thanks for your hard work. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:33, 1 July 2010 (EDT)

== Re: "Canada Newspapers" category ==

Whoops. Looks like I've made a glaringly obvious mistake. Didn't notice it at first - I'm quite tired at the moment, and isn't really thinking straight. You're right, that needs to be fixed. Thanks. [[User:JonB|JonB]] 12:33, 2 July 2010 (EDT)

== Great block again! ==

Great block again!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:43, 3 July 2010 (EDT)

== Superb edit ==

Superb edit to [[continents]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:06, 6 July 2010 (EDT)
:Thank you! [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 11:12, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== Blocking ==

Tyler, the block of RonLar seems overzealous to me, unless I'm missing something. We allow criticism on talk pages and I plan to respond to him. We welcome liberals as long as they do not violate basic common-sense rules as outlined in [[Conservapedia Commandments]]. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:17, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

==I'm a bird brain==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cormorant&curid=21805&diff=799074&oldid=799072&rcid=880195 pointing out this] ... I had thought a cormorant was a kind of [[raisin]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:01, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:I'd never heard of it, but I thought I'd copy edit it as long as I was hitting random page a bunch of times. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 14:17, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

::Better keep away from that [[Special:Random|Random page]] button (unless you want the quality of our articles to go up. ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:54, 29 July 2010 (EDT)
:::You worried me there for a second! I watch the recent changes page in another tab, to check for vandalism, so all I saw at first was "Stop !!!" in the edit summary. As far as improvements go, one of these days I'll get a script going that'll fix reference errors, typos, etc. That'll be nice. Haha key words here being "one of these days" when I have the time. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 15:04, 29 July 2010 (EDT)

== Your welcome ==

You are very welcome. Godspeed. [[User:Jwilhem|Jwilhem]] 12:24, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==False arguments based on slippery wording==

We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". This is like the distinction between real [[air pollution]] and things like "emitting gases which liberals say will cause enhanced global warming".

The destruction of distinctions is one of the tactics of liberals and totalitarians, as noted in George Orwell's ''[[1984]]'' - with the aim to reduce all human speech to nothing more significant than animal noises (see [[duckspeak]]).

We can also see it in the drive for [[homosexual marriage]], as if it made '''any''' sense to speak of a pair of men (or women) as a "married" couple.

In terms of classical logic, the argument goes like this:
#Torture is so bad that it should always be against the law.
#P is torture.
#Therefore, P should be against the law.

Liberals and other enemies of US security (and the security of our allies and friends) don't care whether anyone is being tortured. They only want America's enemies to win. So they try to ban things that we need in our fight against them.

If they really cared about torture, they would shout to the high heavens about what Saddam did to political prisoners, or what China is still doing to the [[Falun Gong]]. When was the last time you heard or saw anything about THAT in the mainstream media?

Whenever there's a [[double standard]], you can always find that what they really want is different from what they say. That's why no one really trusts the liberals. They only use people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:20, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:While I agree with your point, I guess I'm confused as to what brought your comment on? Is this related to one of my edits? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 19:45, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::[[Walling]] ... sorry, I guess I went on a bit of a tangent there, didn't I? You know, one idea sparking another. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:43, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
:::Not a problem at all. Like I said, I heartily agree, I just wasn't sure if one of my numerous copy edits had done the same. I added a cite to the walling article, I think, but I think that's still good. "We need to distinguish between real [[torture]] and "things prohibited by anti-torture laws". I ''definitely'' have to agree on that one. Maybe I'm wrong in this, given that I see no problem with "enhanced interrogation" as I hear it called now (I mean come on, at summer camp we'd see who could hold our breath the longest in the deep end of the pool, and we never complained that it "simulated drowning") but I think that the distinction you mentioned probably gets washed away too much, wouldn't you say? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:40, 30 July 2010 (EDT)
::::'''Note:''' So in hindsight, maybe "washed away" in reference to water boarding was a really awful, albeit accidental, pun... :P Maybe the distinctions get "glossed over?" Yeah something like that. Washed away: right meaning, but probably poor word choice. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 23:42, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

==Grammatical error==

I know this sounds obsessive, but the constant misuse of the word "cliché" on the internet drives me crazy. Cliché is not an adjective; it is a noun. "It sounds cliche but sue me" should be "It sounds clichéd but sue me". I don't know where this notion that cliche is an adjective came from, but it is now ''everywhere'' on the web. Pardon my lunacy. I'll go and lie down now. [[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 14:49, 02 August 2010 (BST)

Tony Hancock

2009-09-06T13:50:49Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian.

Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War, before achieving modest fame in the radio show ''Educating Archie''. In 1954 he began work on the iconic show ''Hancock''. Later becoming a model for the standard sitcom, ''Hancock'' was one of the most popular radio phenomena of the 1950s. A subsequent television incarnation, also written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, confirmed Hancock's gift for dry, sombre humor. Unhappily for Hancock, later efforts to break away from Galton and Simpson failed and he committed suicide in Australia in 1968. A drinker and a womaniser, Hancock is often regarded as the archetypal miserable comic. His shows are, however, still hugely admired in Britain.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hancock, Tony}}
[[Category:Comedians]]

Tony Hancock

2009-09-05T20:05:24Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian.

Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War, before achieving modest fame in the radio show ''Educating Archie''. In 1954 he began work on the enormously popular show ''Hancock''. Later becoming a model for the standard sitcom, ''Hancock'' was one of the most popular radio shows of the 1950s. A subsequent television incarnation, also written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, confirmed Hancock's gift for dry, sombre humor. Unhappily for Hancock, later efforts to break away from Galton and Simpson failed and he committed suicide in Australia in 1968. A drinker and a womaniser, Hancock is often regarded as the archetypal miserable comic. His shows are, however, still hugely admired in Britain.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hancock, Tony}}
[[Category:Comedians]]

Anthony Powell

2009-09-05T20:03:43Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony Dymoke Powell''', (December 21, 1905–March 28, 2000) was an English comic novelist, diarist and biographer, whose most famous work is the celebrated 12-volume roman fleuve ''A Dance to the Music of Time.'' Published between 1951 and 1975, the book details the progress of upper-middle class English life from before the First World War until the decadent aftermath of the 1960s.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Powell, Evelyn}}
[[Category:Authors]]

Tony Hancock

2009-09-05T20:02:33Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian.

Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War, before achieving modest fame in the radio show ''Educating Archie''. In 1954 he began work on the enormously popular show ''Hancock''. Later becoming a model for the standard sitcom, ''Hancock'' was one of the most popular radio shows of the 1950s. A subsequent television incarnation, also written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, confirmed Hancock's gift for dry, sombre humor. Unhappily for Hancock, later efforts to break away from Galton and Simpson failed and he committed suicide in Australia in 1968. A drinker and a womaniser, Hancock is often regarded as the archetypal miserable comic. His shows are, however, still hugely admired in Britain.

Tony Hancock

2009-09-05T19:59:56Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian.

Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War, before achieving modest fame in the radio show Educating Archie. In 1954 he began work on the enormously popular show Hancock. Later becoming a model for the standard sitcom, Hancock was one of the most popular radio shows of the 1950s. A subsequent television incarnation, also written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, confirmed Hancock's gift for dry, sombre humor. Unhappily for Hancock, later efforts to break away from Galton and Simpson failed and he committed suicide in Australia in 1968. A drinker and a womaniser, Hancock is often regarded as the archetypal miserable comic. His shows are, however, still hugely admired in Britain.

Tony Hancock

2009-09-05T19:59:25Z

Jdixon: Created page with ''''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian. Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War,...'

'''Anthony John Hancock''' (b 12 May 1924; d 24 June 1968) was a British actor and comedian. Born in Birmingham and raised in Bournmouth, Hancock served in the Second World War, before achieving modest fame in the radio show Educating Archie. In 1954 he began work on the enormously popular show Hancock. Later becoming a model for the standard sitcom, Hancock was one of the most popular radio shows of the 1950s. A subsequent television incarnation, also written by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, confirmed Hancock's gift for dry, sombre humor. Unhappily for Hancock, later efforts to break away from Galton and Simpson failed and he committed suicide in Australia in 1968. A drinker and a womaniser, Hancock is often regarded as the archetypal miserable comic. His shows are, however, still hugely admired in Britain.

Anthony Powell

2009-09-05T15:27:33Z

Jdixon:

'''Anthony Dymoke Powell''', (December 21, 1905–March 28, 2000) was an English comic novelist, diarist and biographer, whose most famous work is the celebrated 12-volume roman fleuve A Dance to the Music of Time. Published between 1951 and 1975, the book details the progress of upper-middle class English life from before the First World War until the decadent aftermath of the 1960s.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Powell, Evelyn}}
[[Category:Authors]]

Anthony Powell

2009-09-05T13:22:57Z

Jdixon: Created page with ''''Anthony Dymoke Powell''', (December 21, 1905–March 28, 2000) is an English comic novelist, diarist and biographer, whose most famous work is the celebrated 12-volume ro...'

'''Anthony Dymoke Powell''', (December 21, 1905–March 28, 2000) is an English comic novelist, diarist and biographer, whose most famous work is the celebrated 12-volume roman fleuve A Dance to the Music of Time. Published between 1951 and 1975, the book details the progress of upper-middle class English life from before the First World War until the decadent aftermath of the 1960s.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Powell, Evelyn}}
[[Category:Authors]]