Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-03T17:30:34Z

PSMax8956:

[[Image:Bll.png|thumb|right|Bill O' Reilly On The O' Reilly Report]]
'''Bill O'Reilly''' is a political commentator and host of the show ''The O'Reilly Factor'' on the [[Fox News Channel]], which he calls the "No Spin Zone." O'Reilly often remarks that his personal political viewpoint is not captured by the modern [[Democratic Party|Democratic]] and [[Republican Party|Republican]] archetypes and would rather call himself a "traditionalist." In this vein, he has expressed support for some positions not traditionally associated with his political supporters including anthropogenic climate change and civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples.

''The O'Reilly Factor'' is the highest-rated hours on any cable news channel. 20 million people a week watch the show and there are millions more who listen to him on radio stations. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/23/60minutes/main645202.shtml Bill O'Reilly: "No Spin"] Transcript 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace aired Sept. 26, 2004. </ref>

In October of 2004 Andrea Mackris, a former O'Reilly employee filed a sexual harrassment lawsuit alleging that the popular television host made a series of sexually explicit telephone calls to her. Bill O'Reilly countersued, alleging that Mackris attempted to extort 60 Million dollars from him. The case was eventually settled out of court and the details were kept confidential. <ref> [http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html] Copy of lawsuit filed in the State of New York. </ref>
<ref>Globe and Mail(Canada)October 30, 2004, "O'Reilly, Fox producer reach out-of-court deal."</ref>
<ref>Daily News (New York)October 29, 2004 "O'REILLY SETTLES SUIT Paying millions in sex-harassment case."</ref>
<ref>GREGORIAN, DAREH, New York Post. October 30, 2004 "THE O'SMILEY FACTOR ; ACCUSER AXED BUT $ATISFIED."</ref>
<ref>Gregorian, Dareh, New York Post. October 29, 2004 "NOW, $HUT UP! O'REILLY ACCUSER GETS CASH FOR SILENCE"</ref>

==Trivia==

* O'Reilly and [[Stephen Colbert]] have a friendly rivalry, even appearing on each others' shows.

* O'Reilly is mentioned many times in and is featured on the cover of the New York Times best selling book: ''Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them'', by [[Al Franken]].

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Oreilly, Bill}} 
[[Category:Broadcasters|Oreilly, Bill]]

Debate:Is Scientology a false religion?

2007-08-03T17:20:41Z

PSMax8956: /* Definite YES. */

{{debate}}

[[Scientology]] has recently become a hot spot of debate at this site, its one of the more [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Statistics popular] articles and has been getting a lot of attention on the talk page and subject to revert wars. So I was curious what the community actually thinks. Is scientology a false religion? Is it a threat to Christianity?

==No==
Not false as its own religion. False as a Christian religion. It's not a threat to Christians. Christians already have their Bible of Old and New Testaments. Maybe this is why some consider themselves Christians and yet aren't following anything taught by Christ's original Disciples. But I wouldn't count that as a threat.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 18:08, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

:"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
::—Matthew 7:16-20
Apart from a litigious attitude toward public criticism of Scientology, I'm not personally aware of Scientologists as having done anything terrible. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:58, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

:Really? Operation Snow White? Lisa McPherson? There are many others. Scientology kills. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 19:21, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::Huh? I've never heard of these ... could you explain what these are? [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 14:42, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Operation Freakout: Paullet Cooper wrote a critical book on Scientology, the church attempts to plant false evidence to get her convicted of federal crimes. Operation Snowhite: Scientologist infiltrate the IRS to destroy documents about the church and find information on critics, Hubbards wife and 17 others are convicted and sent to jail. Hubbard himself has been convicted of fraud at a Federal level. The Lisa McPherson story is complicated and told elsewhere if you google it, essentially the church was at the VERY least complicit in her death, if not the out and out cause of it. There are MANY more examples. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:49, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Check out their [http://www.xenu.net/fairgame-e.html fair game] policy. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:51, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

It's no more preposterous than any other religion. [stubbstarbuck]] 18:59, 28 June 2007 (EDT)

:::Whaddya mean, ''religion''? Try, "is Scientology a thriving cult of greed and power that gives all religious movements a bad name, and I'll say yes. The premises of the question are false. [[User:Cthx]]

==Yes, but..==
I certainly believe their beliefs to be false, but what is important is that others see the facts and decide for themselves. As the Scientologists say, we should chose to believe or not. Why do they feel a need to obscure their beliefs with law suits?--[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 19:05, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes, but all religions are false in that they attempt to have you believe in something that does not exist. Scientology does have a sinister element that other religions lack. Other faiths have their elements (TV preachers for example) that seek to bilk the faithful out of their money. Scientology does this, and they do target their enemies--[[User:1048247|1048247]] 14:58, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

The misdeeds of a few should not condemn the faith of the many. In Scientology, it seems the whole idea is corrupt, unlike Christianity.--[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 15:15, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

:Christianity teaches that all animals that weren't in a big boat died when it rained a lot. People take this literally. Can you really say this indicates a lack of corruption? --[[User:JeffersonDarcy|JeffersonDarcy]] 15:17, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

The fact that some Christians take the story of the flood literally does not indicate that they are corrupt. It does indicate an appaling lack of intellect.--[[User:1048247|1048247]] 15:23, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Just because you can't see doesn't mean there is no God. Atheists are fools with their own holiday, fools day. Do you believe that we live in a world that has wind? Where is it, I can't see it, must not be there, it is false. Nothing brings itself from non-being into being. --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 18:00, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:Yes, scientology is a false religion because it was just a religion created by a sci-fi writer to make money. I think that scientology is harmful to Christianity because it can confuse would be Christians into believing the teachings of scientology. [[User:AdrianP|AdrianP]] 00:55, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

How can one religion ever be a threat to another religion short of physically forcing conversion? If the teachings of your religion are sound, and they bring hope and peace to the followers another religion won't tempt them. Its like a man thinking that every other man out there constitutes a threat to his marriage because he might lure his wife away. If the marriage is strong, she won't leave. -gasmonkey

Yes, no buts.. Scientology is a bunch of rubbish unless you believe in outerspace aliens, that live in our bodies and control our minds. The tyranny of the galactic God Xenu and his evil body thetans.--[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 17:41, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:How is that no buts? You just said that if you believe in that stuff then it's not rubbish. Just because you find it silly, doesn't mean that your neighbor does too. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 10:48, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

:Yes, Scientology is a false religion, no buts about it. Unless of course, your neighbor believes in it, then it is an actual religion, praise Xenu. Just playing with words, do you not find it cute?--[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 15:39, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Any religion appears weird if you weren't raised with it. - [[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]
: Uh... then how do you explain conversions (Muslim to Christian, for example)? - [[User:JCasto]]
::Or the other way round for that matter, I think that more Christians convert to Muslims than vice versa. No data, just the impression from certain high profile conversions like Muhammed Ali or Yusuf Islam. The problem is that religion is not based on logic but on emotion. If someone is brought up in a certain faith and they are not getting what they need from it then they will look for something else. Sometimes it is a wholesale conversion, othertimes it is supplementing with other beliefs; such as Nancy Reagan with astrology. Being a psychological thing it is very difficult to explain any of it. How does one explain the Mormon church or Islam? They only exist through the word an individual (no offence intended). Sufficiently charismatic people can persuade others to do things, or believe things that they might not otherwise do. Some of it can be explained but charlatans prefer that it is not so they can dupe the gullible. Anyone want to buy a bridge in London? [[User:Ian St John|Ian St John]] 19:26, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

That's different, Islam and Christianity have the same roots and share a number of basic beliefs, furthermore their followers are aware of each other's existence from a very young age, while many people only hear about scientology in their teens.

[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

There is a verified quote by Hubbard who said "Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion."

As the story goes, Heinlein and Hubbard were sitting in a bar one night with a bunch of other SF authors. The bet theory goes that RAH and LRH made a bet as to who could start a religion. According to this theory [[Stranger in a Strange Land]] was Heinlein's entry to the bet, and Dianetics was Hubbard's. One of those authors was [[Harlan Ellison]] - a transcript of his interview in the '70s adds some background to the bet theory [http://www.islets.net/faq.html#Anchor-Was-47857 Harlan Ellison website (warning, contains foul language)]. This may well be [[urban legend]], but I'm inclined to believe it to have more truth than fiction.

That said, the idea behind Scientology is one that closely mirrors Gnostic beliefs - Hubbard drew from history for his material. An interesting book to read on the subject is ''The Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew''[http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Christianities-Battles-Scripture-Faiths/dp/0195141830] which goes into some of the gnostic beliefs of some sects of early Christianity. The parallels between Scientology and early gnostic Christianity are very strong.

Within Scientology, you have the full range of people who practice - as you do in any religion. You have those who are trying to find meaning in their life. You have those trying to make money. You have those who are trying to convert/save others.

While the origins of Scientology are debateably monetarily inclined, there are people for whom it gives a direction in life. To that extent, Scientology is an institutionalized system of attitudes, beliefs, and practices and it is an honest religion for some people. I don't believe it was conceived as such originally. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 19:31, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:: What ever you say Mtur, I love your parallels connection, says much about you. Maybe you can start some Conservapedia entries then. You know what else is an honest religion? Waking up at the same time everyday. Taking a whiz and a shower. Getting dressed for the day ahead. I believe it will start this way. I adjust my attitude and put into practice. Scientology, A religion? Cult --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 21:55, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:::Let see... claims to be a religion. Demands money from its followers. Viciously attacks all who speak negatively of it, including some high-profile journalists. Absolutly rediculous core doctrine (Xenu the galactic ruler?). Shadey origins. Clearly for-profit. Secretive internal workings. Frequent accusations of illegal activities, some of which have resulted in convictions. Sounds like a cult to me. And a quite dangerous one, by some accounts - remember, Scientologists are required to reject the use of conventional medications. There was even one case where an epileptic joined the church and was told he didn't really need his anti-seisure medication. He died not long after, as a direct result of his refusal to take said medication. - BornAgainBrit

BornAgainBrit all your accusations against scientologist also are mirrored in christianity especially in the south. Clearly for profit-pick a TV preacher
Secretive Internal workings-come on do i really even have to address this matter? Frequent accusations of illegal activities- priests. Many christian sects are required to reject modern medicine. If scientology is a cult that so is every religion on the face of the earth.

When a religous profite is a fiction writer that never intended to create a religion, thats a sign of a fake religion.

==Definite YES.==

Basically, all their babbling about Xenu and similar, utter nonsense makes my head hurt. The founder had a great idea about how to make money: he realized this idea, made a huge load of money, and died a rich man. Is there a lot more to say? Oh, yes, he DID leave a huge mess of a cult behind to trouble our already-more-than-troubled world some more. Gee, thanks.
So, I´ll just say YES, with no "But" attached.

It's not true creation because dinosaurs are myths, our earth is flat, and heaven is the clouds.--[[User:Edtropolis|Edtropolis]] 16:21, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

:Exactly. Our story is right because the Bible says it's right, and their story is wrong because they don't have the Bible. Why would you ever want to look deeper than that? [[User:Kristkrispies|Kristkrispies]] 12:17, 4 July 2007 (EDT)

Yes. It is just as false and liberal as such devious religions as Satanism, Atheism, Arabism, and pro-choicism. Is it simply a coincedence that "''[[science]]''" (which is known to be false, because it opposes [[The Bible]]) appears in the word "'''''Scien'''tology''"? All Scientologists must be converted to Christianity NOW. --[[User:Cranky Joe|Cranky Joe]] 14:36, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Seriously, man we could use some more bigotry to get the point across. [[The Bible]] could never be wrong, especially with all of our non-malevolent, non-manipulative human translators and monarchs who have had the good book warped into an evil artifact from a corrupt regime. I dare say Bush might be releasing a similar copy under the title, "'''Bush Universal Translation: '''With new words 'n evrytheeng!'''".[[User:Walkebb|Walkebb]]

It is all summed up in this one quote. "The best way to make money is to create your own religion" - L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology. Look, there is a difference between a religion ([[Christianity]], [[Islam]], [[Buddhism]], [[Unitarian Universalism]], etc.), and a MONEYMAKING SCAM. [[User:PSMax8956|PSMax8956]] 13:20, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==I generally define a cult as==

1. They lie about their religious beliefs because they directors themselves know how nutty their beliefs are and that they will dissuade prospective converts. Hence, cults like Scientology lie about their beliefs. Only after a convert joins are they inducted into the real cult.

2. Salvation at a price. If I didn’t put money in that plate on Sunday the priest would still serve me communion. Yet cults like Scientology charge a heavy price for their “therapy” treatments.

Religions proudly profess their message over the hilltops and want to help people because virtue is its own reward not money.

Scientology is generally considered a cult simply because there are so few members. However by my standards a few “mainstream” religions are cults.

Can any religion or cult really be debunked?

To the believer no. To a Scientologist it all makes perfect sense. There would be no evidence proving or disproving their religious/cult beliefs.

To the non-believer yes. Scientology knows just how nutty it is and so it lies about its beliefs. The best course of action is to let the public know what Scientology is really about and let them decide.

3. Christianity.

Debate:Is Scientology a false religion?

2007-08-03T17:20:19Z

PSMax8956: /* Definite YES. */

{{debate}}

[[Scientology]] has recently become a hot spot of debate at this site, its one of the more [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Statistics popular] articles and has been getting a lot of attention on the talk page and subject to revert wars. So I was curious what the community actually thinks. Is scientology a false religion? Is it a threat to Christianity?

==No==
Not false as its own religion. False as a Christian religion. It's not a threat to Christians. Christians already have their Bible of Old and New Testaments. Maybe this is why some consider themselves Christians and yet aren't following anything taught by Christ's original Disciples. But I wouldn't count that as a threat.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 18:08, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

:"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
::—Matthew 7:16-20
Apart from a litigious attitude toward public criticism of Scientology, I'm not personally aware of Scientologists as having done anything terrible. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:58, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

:Really? Operation Snow White? Lisa McPherson? There are many others. Scientology kills. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 19:21, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::Huh? I've never heard of these ... could you explain what these are? [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 14:42, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Operation Freakout: Paullet Cooper wrote a critical book on Scientology, the church attempts to plant false evidence to get her convicted of federal crimes. Operation Snowhite: Scientologist infiltrate the IRS to destroy documents about the church and find information on critics, Hubbards wife and 17 others are convicted and sent to jail. Hubbard himself has been convicted of fraud at a Federal level. The Lisa McPherson story is complicated and told elsewhere if you google it, essentially the church was at the VERY least complicit in her death, if not the out and out cause of it. There are MANY more examples. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:49, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Check out their [http://www.xenu.net/fairgame-e.html fair game] policy. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 14:51, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

It's no more preposterous than any other religion. [stubbstarbuck]] 18:59, 28 June 2007 (EDT)

:::Whaddya mean, ''religion''? Try, "is Scientology a thriving cult of greed and power that gives all religious movements a bad name, and I'll say yes. The premises of the question are false. [[User:Cthx]]

==Yes, but..==
I certainly believe their beliefs to be false, but what is important is that others see the facts and decide for themselves. As the Scientologists say, we should chose to believe or not. Why do they feel a need to obscure their beliefs with law suits?--[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 19:05, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes, but all religions are false in that they attempt to have you believe in something that does not exist. Scientology does have a sinister element that other religions lack. Other faiths have their elements (TV preachers for example) that seek to bilk the faithful out of their money. Scientology does this, and they do target their enemies--[[User:1048247|1048247]] 14:58, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

The misdeeds of a few should not condemn the faith of the many. In Scientology, it seems the whole idea is corrupt, unlike Christianity.--[[User:JoyousOne|JoyousOne]] 15:15, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

:Christianity teaches that all animals that weren't in a big boat died when it rained a lot. People take this literally. Can you really say this indicates a lack of corruption? --[[User:JeffersonDarcy|JeffersonDarcy]] 15:17, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

The fact that some Christians take the story of the flood literally does not indicate that they are corrupt. It does indicate an appaling lack of intellect.--[[User:1048247|1048247]] 15:23, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Just because you can't see doesn't mean there is no God. Atheists are fools with their own holiday, fools day. Do you believe that we live in a world that has wind? Where is it, I can't see it, must not be there, it is false. Nothing brings itself from non-being into being. --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 18:00, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:Yes, scientology is a false religion because it was just a religion created by a sci-fi writer to make money. I think that scientology is harmful to Christianity because it can confuse would be Christians into believing the teachings of scientology. [[User:AdrianP|AdrianP]] 00:55, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

How can one religion ever be a threat to another religion short of physically forcing conversion? If the teachings of your religion are sound, and they bring hope and peace to the followers another religion won't tempt them. Its like a man thinking that every other man out there constitutes a threat to his marriage because he might lure his wife away. If the marriage is strong, she won't leave. -gasmonkey

Yes, no buts.. Scientology is a bunch of rubbish unless you believe in outerspace aliens, that live in our bodies and control our minds. The tyranny of the galactic God Xenu and his evil body thetans.--[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 17:41, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:How is that no buts? You just said that if you believe in that stuff then it's not rubbish. Just because you find it silly, doesn't mean that your neighbor does too. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 10:48, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

:Yes, Scientology is a false religion, no buts about it. Unless of course, your neighbor believes in it, then it is an actual religion, praise Xenu. Just playing with words, do you not find it cute?--[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 15:39, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Any religion appears weird if you weren't raised with it. - [[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]
: Uh... then how do you explain conversions (Muslim to Christian, for example)? - [[User:JCasto]]
::Or the other way round for that matter, I think that more Christians convert to Muslims than vice versa. No data, just the impression from certain high profile conversions like Muhammed Ali or Yusuf Islam. The problem is that religion is not based on logic but on emotion. If someone is brought up in a certain faith and they are not getting what they need from it then they will look for something else. Sometimes it is a wholesale conversion, othertimes it is supplementing with other beliefs; such as Nancy Reagan with astrology. Being a psychological thing it is very difficult to explain any of it. How does one explain the Mormon church or Islam? They only exist through the word an individual (no offence intended). Sufficiently charismatic people can persuade others to do things, or believe things that they might not otherwise do. Some of it can be explained but charlatans prefer that it is not so they can dupe the gullible. Anyone want to buy a bridge in London? [[User:Ian St John|Ian St John]] 19:26, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

That's different, Islam and Christianity have the same roots and share a number of basic beliefs, furthermore their followers are aware of each other's existence from a very young age, while many people only hear about scientology in their teens.

[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

There is a verified quote by Hubbard who said "Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion."

As the story goes, Heinlein and Hubbard were sitting in a bar one night with a bunch of other SF authors. The bet theory goes that RAH and LRH made a bet as to who could start a religion. According to this theory [[Stranger in a Strange Land]] was Heinlein's entry to the bet, and Dianetics was Hubbard's. One of those authors was [[Harlan Ellison]] - a transcript of his interview in the '70s adds some background to the bet theory [http://www.islets.net/faq.html#Anchor-Was-47857 Harlan Ellison website (warning, contains foul language)]. This may well be [[urban legend]], but I'm inclined to believe it to have more truth than fiction.

That said, the idea behind Scientology is one that closely mirrors Gnostic beliefs - Hubbard drew from history for his material. An interesting book to read on the subject is ''The Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew''[http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Christianities-Battles-Scripture-Faiths/dp/0195141830] which goes into some of the gnostic beliefs of some sects of early Christianity. The parallels between Scientology and early gnostic Christianity are very strong.

Within Scientology, you have the full range of people who practice - as you do in any religion. You have those who are trying to find meaning in their life. You have those trying to make money. You have those who are trying to convert/save others.

While the origins of Scientology are debateably monetarily inclined, there are people for whom it gives a direction in life. To that extent, Scientology is an institutionalized system of attitudes, beliefs, and practices and it is an honest religion for some people. I don't believe it was conceived as such originally. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 19:31, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:: What ever you say Mtur, I love your parallels connection, says much about you. Maybe you can start some Conservapedia entries then. You know what else is an honest religion? Waking up at the same time everyday. Taking a whiz and a shower. Getting dressed for the day ahead. I believe it will start this way. I adjust my attitude and put into practice. Scientology, A religion? Cult --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 21:55, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:::Let see... claims to be a religion. Demands money from its followers. Viciously attacks all who speak negatively of it, including some high-profile journalists. Absolutly rediculous core doctrine (Xenu the galactic ruler?). Shadey origins. Clearly for-profit. Secretive internal workings. Frequent accusations of illegal activities, some of which have resulted in convictions. Sounds like a cult to me. And a quite dangerous one, by some accounts - remember, Scientologists are required to reject the use of conventional medications. There was even one case where an epileptic joined the church and was told he didn't really need his anti-seisure medication. He died not long after, as a direct result of his refusal to take said medication. - BornAgainBrit

BornAgainBrit all your accusations against scientologist also are mirrored in christianity especially in the south. Clearly for profit-pick a TV preacher
Secretive Internal workings-come on do i really even have to address this matter? Frequent accusations of illegal activities- priests. Many christian sects are required to reject modern medicine. If scientology is a cult that so is every religion on the face of the earth.

When a religous profite is a fiction writer that never intended to create a religion, thats a sign of a fake religion.

==Definite YES.==

Basically, all their babbling about Xenu and similar, utter nonsense makes my head hurt. The founder had a great idea about how to make money: he realized this idea, made a huge load of money, and died a rich man. Is there a lot more to say? Oh, yes, he DID leave a huge mess of a cult behind to trouble our already-more-than-troubled world some more. Gee, thanks.
So, I´ll just say YES, with no "But" attached.

It's not true creation because dinosaurs are myths, our earth is flat, and heaven is the clouds.--[[User:Edtropolis|Edtropolis]] 16:21, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

:Exactly. Our story is right because the Bible says it's right, and their story is wrong because they don't have the Bible. Why would you ever want to look deeper than that? [[User:Kristkrispies|Kristkrispies]] 12:17, 4 July 2007 (EDT)

Yes. It is just as false and liberal as such devious religions as Satanism, Atheism, Arabism, and pro-choicism. Is it simply a coincedence that "''[[science]]''" (which is known to be false, because it opposes [[The Bible]]) appears in the word "'''''Scien'''tology''"? All Scientologists must be converted to Christianity NOW. --[[User:Cranky Joe|Cranky Joe]] 14:36, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Seriously, man we could use some more bigotry to get the point across. [[The Bible]] could never be wrong, especially with all of our non-malevolent, non-manipulative human translators and monarchs who have had the good book warped into an evil artifact from a corrupt regime. I dare say Bush might be releasing a similar copy under the title, "'''Bush Universal Translation: '''With new words 'n evrytheeng!'''".[[User:Walkebb|Walkebb]]

It is all summed up in this one quote. "The best way to make money is to create your own religion" - L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology. Look, there is a difference between a religion ([[Christianity]], [[Islam]], [[Buddhism]], [[Unitarian Universalism]], etc.), and a MONEYMAKING SCAM.

==I generally define a cult as==

1. They lie about their religious beliefs because they directors themselves know how nutty their beliefs are and that they will dissuade prospective converts. Hence, cults like Scientology lie about their beliefs. Only after a convert joins are they inducted into the real cult.

2. Salvation at a price. If I didn’t put money in that plate on Sunday the priest would still serve me communion. Yet cults like Scientology charge a heavy price for their “therapy” treatments.

Religions proudly profess their message over the hilltops and want to help people because virtue is its own reward not money.

Scientology is generally considered a cult simply because there are so few members. However by my standards a few “mainstream” religions are cults.

Can any religion or cult really be debunked?

To the believer no. To a Scientologist it all makes perfect sense. There would be no evidence proving or disproving their religious/cult beliefs.

To the non-believer yes. Scientology knows just how nutty it is and so it lies about its beliefs. The best course of action is to let the public know what Scientology is really about and let them decide.

3. Christianity.

Cable News Network

2007-08-03T16:52:00Z

PSMax8956:

[[Image:LOGOCNN.png|right|thumb]]
'''CNN''' (officially the '''Cable News Network''') is the oldest 24 hour cable news channel in the [[United States]]. First started in 1980 by [[Ted Turner]] it is a division of the Turner Broadcasting System, which is owned by AOL Time Warner.

From its origin as a cable-only service, CNN now broadcasts worldwide by satellite, with programs presented from studios in several countries in addition to their headquarters in Atlanta. Some regions receive locally produced opt-outs (under the name "CNN International"), and there are also broadcasts in [[Spanish]], [[German]], [[Italian]], [[Croatian]], [[Turkish]] and [[Gaelic]].

== Allegations of Bias ==

It has been accused by media critics of having a liberal slant to their reporting.<ref>http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/13</ref>

== References ==

<References/>

== News Anchors ==
*[[Larry King]]
*[[Glenn Beck]]
*[[Anderson Cooper]]
*[[Paula Zahn]]
*[[Campbell Brown]]
*[[Lou Dobbs]]

==External Links==
:[http://www.cnn.com/ CNN official site]
[[category:broadcasting]]
[[Category:Television]]
[[Category:Media]]

Amy Goodman

2007-08-03T16:46:23Z

PSMax8956: /* See Also */

'''Amy Goodman''' (April 13, 1957 -) is an American journalist, host of the [[Democracy Now]] newscast on [[Pacifica Radio]], who is widely praised for her journalism skills, and in-depth interviews of guests, regardless of political position. However, she has gained criticism from people such as former President [[Bill Clinton]], who accuse her of being disrespectful in her interviews.

==See Also==
[[Edward R. Murrow]]

[[Keith Olbermann]]

Amy Goodman

2007-08-03T16:46:14Z

PSMax8956: New page: '''Amy Goodman''' (April 13, 1957 -) is an American journalist, host of the Democracy Now newscast on Pacifica Radio, who is widely praised for her journalism skills, and in-depth ...

Edward R. Murrow

2007-08-03T16:40:48Z

PSMax8956:

'''Edward R. Murrow''' (April 25, 1908 - April 27, 1965) was a journalist, who took a stand and risked losing his job to expose the wrongdoings of [[Joseph McCarthy]].

==See Also==
[[Amy Goodman]]

[[Keith Olbermann]]

Edward R. Murrow

2007-08-03T16:40:31Z

PSMax8956:

'''Edward R. Murrow''' (April 25, 1908 - April 27, 1965]] was a journalist, who took a stand and risked losing his job to expose the wrongdoings of [[Joseph McCarthy]].

==See Also==
[[Amy Goodman]]

[[Keith Olbermann]]

Edward R. Murrow

2007-08-03T16:39:27Z

PSMax8956: /* See Also */

'''Edward R. Murrow''' was a journalist, who took a stand and risked losing his job to expose the wrongdoings of [[Joseph McCarthy]].

==See Also==
[[Amy Goodman]]

[[Keith Olbermann]]

Edward R. Murrow

2007-08-03T16:39:18Z

PSMax8956: New page: '''Edward R. Murrow''' was a journalist, who took a stand and risked losing his job to expose the wrongdoings of Joseph McCarthy. ==See Also== Amy Goodman Keith Olbermann

'''Edward R. Murrow''' was a journalist, who took a stand and risked losing his job to expose the wrongdoings of [[Joseph McCarthy]].

==See Also==
[[Amy Goodman]]
[[Keith Olbermann]]

Democratic Party

2007-08-03T15:24:49Z

PSMax8956: /* History */

[[Image:democraticpartyusalogo.png|right|thumb|200px|Official logo of the Democratic Party.]]

The '''Democratic Party''' is one of the two major political [[parties]] in the [[United States of America]]. It is generally seen as being politically between center and [[leftist | left]] of center, while the rival [[Republican Party]] is positioned to the [[rightist | right]] of center (see [[political spectrum theory]]). Members and supporters of the Democratic Party are known as Democrats.

The Democrats currently control the [[110th United States Congress]] together with the majority of State governorships and legislatures.<ref>[http://www.multistate.com/Site.nsf/Elections2006PostMaps?OpenPage Multistate.com] Post-Election 2006 Maps</ref> According to a Pew Research Center poll, 50 percent of Americans identify themselves with the Democratic Party as opposed to 35 percent for the Republican Party.<ref>[http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312 Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007] Pew Research Center, 22 March 2007</ref> However, Democrats have served out only three of the last ten presidential terms. Democrats in the US Congress currently have a 66.0% disapproval and only a 25.0% approval rating -- the lowest in ten years since the [[Impeachment#Bill_Clinton|Impeachment]] trial of [[President Clinton]] -- according to the RealClearPolitics Average of several dozens of Congressional Job Approval polls conducted 06/11 - 07/11. <ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/archive/?poll_id=18 RealClearPolitics Congressional Job Approval Poll], 06/11 - 07/11.</ref> ''Investor's Business Daily'' remarked, "For all the promises of its new Democratic leaders, Congress seems truly interested in doing only one thing: surrendering in [[Iraq]]. No wonder its public approval ratings have sunk below the president's." <ref>[http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=264123134498383&kw=For,all,the,promises The Do-One-Thing Congress], ''Investor's Business Daily, May 15, 2007.</ref>

Like the Republicans, the Democrats are currently selecting their candidate for the [[2008 Presidential Election|2008 presidential election]]; the front-runners in the contest are Senator [[Hillary Clinton]] of [[New York]] and Senator [[Barack Obama]] of [[Illinois]]. The most recent president who was a Democrat was [[Bill Clinton]], who served from 1993 to 2001.

==History==
The Democratic Party was founded in 1792 by [[Thomas Jefferson]] as a congressional caucus to fight for the [[Bill of Rights]] and to oppose the elitist [[Federalist Party]] led by [[Alexander Hamilton]], which fought for the [[Constitution]].

In 1798 , the party was officially named the "Democratic-Republican Party", and in 1800 Jefferson was elected as the first Democratic [[President of the United States]]. Jefferson, a member of the landed gentry and a slave owner, served two terms as president with distinction, and was succeeded by another Democrat, [[James Madison]], in 1808 . During Madison's tenure, the United States fought the [[United Kingdom]] and lost terribly during the [[War of 1812]]. Forces from Canada beat back Madison's militias and even managed to burn the White House down. James Monroe, another Democratic-Republican, was elected president in 1816 and led the nation through a time commonly known as "The Era of Good Feelings". In this period, the party dominated American politics with little opposition. Monroe was followed by John Quincy Adams who won the hotly contested election of 1824, becoming the first son of a former president to be elected president.

[[Andrew Jackson]], defeated Adams in the 1828 election and signed into law the [[Indian Removal Act of 1830]] <ref>[http://edweb.tusd.k12.az.us/UHS/APUSH/1st%20Sem/Articles%20Semester%201/Artiles%20Semester%201/Remini.htm Andrew Jackson and Indian Removal], by Robert Remini.</ref> according to the Democratic National Committee's website is "considered — along with Jefferson — one of the founding fathers of the Democratic Party." <ref>[http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/06/our_history.php Democratic National Committee, ''Our History''], retrieved 25 March 2007.</ref> Annual Jefferson-Jackson Day celebrations nationwide by local chapters of the Democratic Party commemorate the two founders of the Democratic Party. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001949.html String of Successes Enlivens Democratic Party], Michael D. Shear, ''The Washington Post'', 22 February 2007.</ref> The Indian Removal Act, enforced through a series of dishonest dealings with native people such as the Treaty of Dancing Rabitt Creek and the Treaty of New Echota, resulted in the wholesale deportation of Native Americans from the Southeastern states to Indian Territory (present day Oklahoma). <http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/>

The Jacksonian period also saw the expansion of the voting franchise as most states did away with, or decreased property requirements for voting. The beneficiaries of the expansion of the franchise however, were nearly all white males. Annual Jefferson-Jackson Day celebrations nationwide by local chapters of the Democratic Party commemorate the two founders of the Democratic Party. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001949.html String of Successes Enlivens Democratic Party], Michael D. Shear, ''The Washington Post'', 22 February 2007.</ref>

Democrat [[Franklin Roosevelt]], who served as President from 1933 to 1945, led the United States during the [[Great Depression]] and throughout most of the [[Second World War]]. Due to his popularity and courageous leadership during the war, he remains the only President elected to four terms. Under his successor, [[Harry Truman]] the United States emerged a victor from World War II and articulated the Doctrine of [[Containment]] which committed the U.S. to stop the spread of global [[Communism]]. Truman ordered the Berlin airlift in 1948 and sent U.S. troops to Korea in 1950.

==Policies and criticism==

In June 2005, while Democrats held a mock impeachment inquiry in President's Bush's foreign policy, [[anti-Semitic]] materials were distributed at the Democratic Party National headquarters. The literature claimed that an Israeli company had warning of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], and an "insider trading scam" on Wall Street had occurred simultaneously. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/16/AR2005061601570.html Democrats Play House To Rally Against the War], Dana Milbank, ''Washington Post'', June 17, 2005.</ref>

The views of individual Democrats sometimes diverge from the party's official stance as expressed in its national platform, however unlike the Republican party, the Democratic National Committee has not allowed dissenting opinions to share the podium on matters such as abortion at National Conventions.

R. Emmetrt Tyrell has been highly critical of the currect Democratic leadership, stating, "Can anything embarrass [[Speaker Pelosi]] and the rest of the Democratic leadership? Frankly I doubt it. They are all neatly shut off from the world in their fantasy of moral and intellectual superiority." <ref>[http://www.nysun.com/article/54321 Vietnam All Over Again] By R. Emmett Tyrell Jr., ''The New York Sun'', May 11, 2007.</ref>

===Economic policy===
In the field of economic policy, Democrats favor high progressive taxes, higher government spending and increasing the minimum wage.'{{fact}}

The Democratic Party has historically had ties to [[labor union|organized labor]]. <ref> http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/913wopoz.asp Paying Dues - The Democrats settle up with their union bosses, [[Weekly Standard]], July 25, 2007 </ref>

The [[National Education Association]],<ref>[http://www.nea.org/index.html National Education Association homepage]</ref> the largest union of public school teachers, is a backbone of the party, supplying the largest number of delegates to its national conventions.{{fact}}

In addition to the Democratic party's reported stance to "tax the rich," some members of the Congressional Democratic Leadership have proposed a 50 cent per gallon tax increase on gasoline which would disproportionately hurt those least able to absorb the cost at a time when worldwide gas prices are at historic highs. <ref>[http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dingell-to-propose-50-cent-gasoline-tax-increase-2007-07-07.html Dingell to propose 50 cent gasoline tax increase], By Chris Good, ''The Hill'', July 07, 2007.</ref>

===Foreign and military policy===
According to its platform, the Democratic Party has the objective of strengthening America. Democratic national leadership has been accused of being ambivalent about terrorism<ref>[http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=22045 "Democrats, ACLU Outraged Over Traveler Terrorism Screening Program"] C. Johnson, Associated Press</ref> and insufficiently patriotic. <ref>[http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/01/smn.19.html CNN Saturday Morning News]Transcript: December 1, 2001 </ref>

===Education===
An organization affiliated with the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] called the [[Progressive Policy Institute]] which claims a long standing opposition to school vouchers <ref>21st Century Schools Project Bulletin: Special Edition [http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110&subsecID=900001&contentID=250630 ''Putting Vouchers in Perspective''], PPI E-newsletter 2 July 2002</ref> reported Jonathan Alter of ''Newsweek'' saying,
:"Can wealthy white liberals - many of whom send their kids to private school - really say to poor parents: 'We can have choices, but you must not?'...This is a glaring hypocrisy sitting at the heart of the liberal opposition to targeted vouchers… Right now, Democrats are in a highly compromised position on education." <ref>[http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=newsLetter&sectionID=29&NLissueID=4&articleID=11&altCol=2 Center For Education Reform, Monthly Letter to Friends No. 75], Back to School 2002.</ref>

===Environment vs Labor===
Two other important coalition groups also find themselves in direct conflict with each other within the Democratic party coalition--[[Environmentalist]]s and Labor Unions.{{fact}} While environmentalists support efforts like clean air and alternative fuels, for example, this creates tension with the workers of American automobile manufactures whose jobs are threatened by environmental policies such as increasing regulations and high costs. Such policies can lead to cutbacks and layoffs. Balancing these issues is difficult because some sacrifices of interests must be made by both sides.

===Healthcare===
The Democrat fondness for heavy government intervention into the marketplace{{fact}} and social engineering{{fact}} means that a significant proportion of their base and of their candidates for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election ideologically favor introducing a system of [[socialized healthcare]]{{fact}}; regardless of the crippling tax burden this would require to sustain itself and the low standard of care achieved by socialized health programs in other countries compared to the United States. However, many first world nations such as France and Britain do have socialized healthcare systems, and are ranked 1 and 18 by the [[World Health Organization]]<ref>http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html</ref>, respectively, compared to the United States' rank of 37. Therefore, many argue that there may be some advantages to a universal health care system. Democrats generally regard [[universal healthcare]] to be a priority because of the appeal to nearly 50 million voters{{fact-political}} without any kind of [[health insurance]]. Among the leading proponents for this idea include [[Barack Obama|Sen. Barack Obama]] and [[John Edwards|Sen. John Edwards]]; the latter formerly being the running mate to [[John Kerry|Sen. John Kerry]] in the [[2004 Presidential Election]].

===Homosexual Agenda===
Democrat lawmakers and opinion-formers consistently favor measures such as the establishment of [[same-sex civil union]]s, [[gay marriage]] and [[gay adoption]] of children over defense of the [[traditional family]]. Likewise they are vigorous in attempting to amend "[[hate crime]]" laws, which some experts maintain would make criticism of the [[homosexual lifestyle]] illegal;<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54535 Christian belief a 'hate crime' under plan], WorldNetDaily, March 3, 2007. </ref> while at the same time supporting efforts to disseminate favorable opinions regarding [[homosexuality]] through channels such as the mainstream media and even the educational system in the face of opposition from churches and religious authorities, a broad coalition of [[Republican Party|Republican]] and Independent politicians. Democrats reject the idea of a [[Homosexual agenda]] preferring to speak in terms of [[Gay rights|"gay rights"]] when this issue is raised; the Democratic Party is the recipient and beneficiary of funding from homosexual lobbying groups and can be seen by their positions as the United States' largest and most powerful ''de facto'' supporter of the Homosexual Agenda. <ref>[http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D000000158 Human Rights Campaign], opensecrets.org </ref>

===Other Policies===
Democrats frequently support the minimum wage, workplace protections, the right of women to choose to have an [[abortion]], [[gun control]], gay marriage, and the separation of church and state.

==Religion==
In the United States, there is some correlation between religious and political affiliation, though people of all faiths and denominations can be found among the supporters of each of the main parties.

Both historically and today, [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] voters have had a tendency to identify with the Democratic Party {{fact}}, and a number of Democratic office-holders, such as Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]], are Catholics. However, several general ideals of the Democratic Party's platform - most notably, the party's overall support for the legality of [[abortion]] - are contrary to the position of the [[Catholic Church]].{{fact}}

With regard to [[Protestant]] Christians, members of [[Evangelical]] churches in particular are associated with the [[Republican Party]]. However, the large majority of Democratic Party members are Protestants. {{fact}} One unusual feature of the Democratic Party, however, is that it draws substantial support both from committed African-American Protestant Christians and from secular and atheist white voters.{{fact}} The strong opposition to [[homosexuality]] found among many Black Protestant Christians (and, indeed, among orthodox Catholics) contrasts strikingly with the support frequently shown by other Democrats for the [[homosexual agenda]].{{fact}} One reason for this contrast could be the Democrats' strong support for minority rights.

Democrats also generally believe that religion should be separate from public life, and as such are typically supported by the ACLU. For example, in 1999 the Congress took up a bill to protect the display of the [[Ten Commandments]]. In the House of Representatives, over 3/4ths of the Democratic party members voted to remove the display. <ref>http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/06/18/gun.rollcall/ten.commandments.html</ref>. The measure did not pass the Legislature, and as a result when Justice [[Roy Moore]] posted a [[Ten Commandments]] display in his courthouse, the ACLU was able to have the display removed.

==Democratic Presidents==
* [[Andrew Jackson]] (1829-1837)
* [[Martin Van Buren]] (1837-1841)
* [[James K. Polk]] (1845-1849)
* [[Franklin Pierce]] (1853-1857)
* [[James Buchanan]] (1857-1861)
* [[Grover Cleveland]] (1885-1889) (1893-1897)
* [[Woodrow Wilson]] (1913-1921)
* [[Franklin Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)
* [[Harry S Truman]] (1945-1953)
* [[John F. Kennedy]] (1961-1963)
* [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] (1963-1969)
* [[Jimmy Carter]] (1977-1981)
* [[Bill Clinton]] (1993-2001)

==See also==
*[[Phonemarks]]

==References==
<references/>

==External links==
*[http://www.democrats.org/ Democratic Party Official Site]
*[http://www.therealdemocratstory.com/ The Real Democrat Story], Open the File on the Freshmen Democrats.

[[Category:American Political Parties]] [[category:political parties]]

Coast to Coast AM

2007-08-03T02:48:52Z

PSMax8956: New page: '''Coast to Coast AM''' is a late-night radio show, often covering the paranormal, but carrying "hard news" as well. George Noory is the current weeknight host of the show, and [[Ian P...

'''Coast to Coast AM''' is a late-night radio show, often covering the paranormal, but carrying "hard news" as well. [[George Noory]] is the current weeknight host of the show, and [[Ian Punnett]] is the Saturday host. On Sundays, the show is either guest-hosted, or reruns are shown.

George Noory

2007-08-03T02:46:33Z

PSMax8956:

'''George Noory''' is the weeknight host of popular late-night talk show [[Coast to Coast AM]].[http://coasttocoastam.com/] He replaced [[Art Bell]] as the weeknight host in 2002

George Noory

2007-08-03T02:46:18Z

PSMax8956:

'''George Noory''' is the weeknight host of popular late-night talk show [[Coast to Coast AM]][http://coasttocoastam.com/]. He replaced [[Art Bell]] as the weeknight host in 2002

George Noory

2007-08-03T02:45:47Z

PSMax8956: New page: '''George Noory''' is the weeknight host of popular late-night talk show Coast to Coast AM. He replaced Art Bell as the weeknight host in 2002 ==External Links/Sources== [[http://...

'''George Noory''' is the weeknight host of popular late-night talk show [[Coast to Coast AM]]. He replaced [[Art Bell]] as the weeknight host in 2002

==External Links/Sources==
[[http://coasttocoastam.com/]]

Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:39:29Z

PSMax8956: If you are going to revert the article, leave a rationale on the talk page

[[Image:Beck glenn.jpg|right|thumb|120px]]
'''Glenn Beck''' is a moderate, talk-radio and television anchor. His radio show, The Glenn Beck Program, is syndicated by over 230 radio stations across the United States. His television show, Glenn Beck airs everyday on [[CNN]] Headline News. He also appears on ABC's Good Morning America. Glenn Beck is a [[Mormon]]. Although many liberals accuse him of being a hate-monger, including NBC opinion host [[Keith Olbermann]], he is actually quite moderate, and can present his conservative arguments in a way that only the most extreme of liberals would call irrational.

==See Also==
:[http://www.glennbeck.com/home/index.shtml Glenn Beck's personal site]
:[http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/glenn.beck/ Glenn Beck on CNN]
{{DEFAULTSORT: Beck, Glenn}}
[[category:broadcasters]]

Debate:Should the United States have entered World War II?

2007-08-02T17:17:30Z

PSMax8956: /* Yes */

{{debate}}

=='''Post Your Thoughts'''==

As Japan attacked the United States and Germany declared war on the United tates, the question is a non-question. Perhaps the question that should have been asked is: Should the United States have aided both China and Britain before war was declared on it. I suggest that in both instances the United States was looking after its long term interests.

The United States was attacked by Japanese forces and the Axis powers threatened to take over Europe. America would be greatly harmed if the axis had taken over Europe because the resources and allies that we had there would no longer exist. If the US didn't want to attack Japan they would look weak to the rest of the world and would risk being attacked again, by the Japanese or another hostile force. So, only looking at the good for America directly it is obvious that war was necessary. The crimes against humanity that the Nazis committed are atrocious but, as we can see from current examples, such as Darfur, it is not enough to get America into battle.
--[[User:Flax+|Flax+]] 20:08, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

== no ==
The British and French were no better than the Nazis. Their imperialism was what drove Germany to such desperate measures. Also, if left alone, Germany would have destroyed the Soviet Union, which would have halted the spread of Communism and the polarization of the Third World during the Cold War. It was basically the other European powers that were adding fuel to Hitler's fire. If Germany defeated them, the German people would seek a more moderate leader. If FDR hadn't interfered with Japanese expansion in the Pacific, America could have avoided war completely. The Japanese never thought for a moment that they could defeat America. They hoped that after winning a few battles, America would be willing to compromise.
[[User:neocorporatist|neocorporatist]]

:Have you read anything about the history of the war in Europe? Or are you simply spouting what other people have said? For a start, the Nazi's were a terrible party who '''murdered''' many millions of Jews, homosexuals, political leaders (who opposed the Nazi's), disabled people and many more besides. How can you possibly say that Britain and France are even comparable to that? Then you go on to say that it would have been better if Germany had defeated Europe and had a one country continent ruled by an evil dictator; oh wait they wouldn't keep the evil dictator they'd get rid of him. Oh, wait a mo, he killed everyone who opposed him so perhaps getting rid of him might be a bit hard! You need to read up on your history if you think that that's an accurate representation of what happened in WW2. [[User:MatteeNeutra|MatteeNeutra]] 15:03, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

==Yes==

As a European I'm glad they did, otherwise I'd probably live under Nazi rule now, that is if none of my ancestors had been disposed of by the party.

So I'm glad the Americans joined in, even though I know their reasons for doing so weren't noble: the Holocaust didn't start until after the Americans got involved and the segregation of Jews in Germany was no different from the segregation of blacks in the US.
[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::most europeans still hate jews.[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 12:38, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Oh, do we? What a claim... [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 12:54, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes because without American intervention the Nazis would be ruling over large portions of the world now.--[[User:Fg|Fg]] 12:57, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Edited a bit as your answer was most likely for the original question, not to me [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 13:14, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

I wasn't aware that I hate Jews.
That's like saying everyone in the southern US still hates blacks.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::the segragation of Jews in Germany was nothing like the segragation of blacks. I am not aware of any death camps in Alabama. The holocaust did start before Americas entry. if the americans reasons werent noble, what were they?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

And its true that many Europeans do still have negative opinions of Jews. According to Abe Foxman of the ADL 21% of europeans consider themselves anti-semitic! thats one-fifth of the population. 40% of Europeans believe Jews have "too much power in financial markets" everyone knows thats the most basic anti-semitic claim. If one-fifth of our beloved continent openly admits anti-semitism, we have a problem.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

I live in Europe, and yes, there is some anti-semitism (like there is everywhere on the planet), but not 20% of the population.

No, really, the "final solution" (including the death camps) was set in motion after the Swannsee conference in 1942, partly because the Nazis felt that they wouldn't have the time and resources to ship the Jews to Madagascar (the original plan) now that the US had entered the war.

There were earlier death camps for political opponents and there was a "euthanasia" policy against the handicapped, but those were not the reasons the US entered the war, the possibility of losing trade partners and allies Great Britain and Australia combined with the attack on Pearl Harbour and pressure from American Jews were.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Those sound like pretty good reasons for war to me. I too live in Europe and even I think that these statistics are high, but the ADL stands by them.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

They are reasons for war, but they do not show the allies were morally superior to the axis (before the Holocaust took place), especially if you count the Soviets with the allies.

Let's face it: there's never been a pure "Good vs Evil" war.

:::were the Soviets really with the Allies?[[Molotov-Ribbentrop pact]] Before the holocaust took place(as you say) the Nazis did many very bad things(large scale anti-semitism among others). The allies were definately morally superior. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

That pact didn't last until 1941, the Nazis fought the Soviets along the eastern front (20 million Soviet and 3 million Germans died on that front), and the Soviets had entered an official alliance with the western allies.

I'm not saying the Nazis were good (their policies were cruel and racist), I'm just saying we don't like to remember the racism and segregation in the US and Australia (isn't racism towards blacks, hispanics, asians and aboriginals just as bad as anti-semitism?), the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans, the Soviet reprisals against civilians, the Soviet deportations, etc...

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::this brigs up interesting debate about USSR. nothing the US or austalia did compares to the actions of Nazis. obviously the Soviets were bad, I personally think they were worse than the nazis.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

In Australia aboriginal kids were put in "re-education camps" and beaten if they spoke their own language, same thing happened to Indians in Canada and hispanics in the US, the US also officially endorsed segregation (also the official policy of Nazi Germany before the Holocaust), natives in the British and French colonies did not have the same rights as Europeans, the allies knew about the atrocities Stalin was committing, but denied it in public, carpet bombing of cities, nuking of 2 cities, that kind of thing...

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

Remember the part where Germany annexed Austria and Czechoslovakia, then invaded Poland? Segregation in the US, the British and French Colonies, and Australia, as wrong as they were, were not the issues at hand in WWII.

Actually, it was completely Germany's fault that the United States entered World War II. Contrary to popular belief, Germany and Japan did not work together very much. Germany did not have to declare war on the United States after Pearl Harbor. If it wasn't for Germany declaring war, the United States would have been fighting WWII in the Pacific Ocean only. [[User:PSMax8956|PSMax8956]] 13:17, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:11:16Z

PSMax8956:

==Moderate?==
What's wrong with calling Glenn Beck a moderate?

Update: I changed the article so that all the facts are neutral. [[User:PSMax8956|PSMax8956]] 13:11, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:10:21Z

PSMax8956:

Talk:Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:06:02Z

PSMax8956: New page: ==Moderate?== What's wrong with calling Glenn Beck a moderate?

==Moderate?==
What's wrong with calling Glenn Beck a moderate?

Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-02T17:03:43Z

PSMax8956:

[[Image:Bll.png|thumb|right|Bill O' Reilly On The O' Reilly Report]]
'''Bill O'Reilly''' is a commentator and host of the political commentary show ''The O'Reilly Factor'' on the [[Fox News Channel]], which he calls the "No Spin Zone." O'Reilly often remarks that his personal political viewpoint is not captured by the modern [[Democratic Party|Democratic]] and [[Republican Party|Republican]] archetypes and would rather call himself a "traditionalist." In this vein, he has expressed support for some positions not traditionally associated with his political supporters including anthropogenic climate change and civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. The hosts who fill in for him, however, are all standard [[conservative]] Republicans, such as [[John Kasich]], [[Michelle Malkin]], and [[Laura Ingraham]]. ([[Tony Snow]] also had filled in a few times prior to becoming White House Press Secretary).

''The O'Reilly Factor'' is the highest-rated hours on any cable news channel. 20 million people a week watch the show and there are millions more who listen to him on radio stations. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/23/60minutes/main645202.shtml Bill O'Reilly: "No Spin"] Transcript 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace aired Sept. 26, 2004. </ref>

In October of 2004 Andrea Mackris, a former O'Reilly employee filed a sexual harrassment lawsuit alleging that the popular television host made a series of sexually explicit telephone calls to her. Bill O'Reilly countersued, alleging that Mackris attempted to extort 60 Million dollars from him. The case was eventually settled out of court and the details were kept confidential. <ref> [http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html] Copy of lawsuit filed in the State of New York. </ref>
<ref>Globe and Mail(Canada)October 30, 2004, "O'Reilly, Fox producer reach out-of-court deal."</ref>
<ref>Daily News (New York)October 29, 2004 "O'REILLY SETTLES SUIT Paying millions in sex-harassment case."</ref>
<ref>GREGORIAN, DAREH, New York Post. October 30, 2004 "THE O'SMILEY FACTOR ; ACCUSER AXED BUT $ATISFIED."</ref>
<ref>Gregorian, Dareh, New York Post. October 29, 2004 "NOW, $HUT UP! O'REILLY ACCUSER GETS CASH FOR SILENCE"</ref>

==Trivia==

* O'Reilly and [[Stephen Colbert]] have a friendly rivalry, even appearing on each others' shows.

* O'Reilly is mentioned many times in and is featured on the cover of the New York Times best selling book: ''Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them'', by [[Al Franken]].

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Oreilly, Bill}} 
[[Category:Broadcasters|Oreilly, Bill]]

Talk:Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-02T17:03:23Z

PSMax8956: /* Opinion Show */

==Opinion Show==
It's kind of obvious that the O'Reilly factor is an opinion show, so it should stay that way.

*That might be a little to radical for some people here, how about "political commentary show"? [[User:Overture|Overture]] 13:02, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

**OK, that should work.

Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:02:39Z

PSMax8956: Reverted vandalism by Niandra

[[Image:Beck glenn.jpg|right|thumb|120px]]
'''Glenn Beck''' is a moderate, talk-radio and television anchor. His radio show, The Glenn Beck Program, is syndicated by over 230 radio stations across the United States. His television show, Glenn Beck airs everyday on [[CNN]] Headline News. He also appears on ABC's Good Morning America. Glenn Beck is a [[Mormon]]. Although many liberals accuse him of being a hate-monger, including NBC anchor [[Keith Olbermann]], he is actually quite moderate, and can present his conservative arguments in a logical way.

==See Also==
:[http://www.glennbeck.com/home/index.shtml Glenn Beck's personal site]
:[http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/glenn.beck/ Glenn Beck on CNN]
{{DEFAULTSORT: Beck, Glenn}}
[[category:broadcasters]]

Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-02T17:01:50Z

PSMax8956:

[[Image:Bll.png|thumb|right|Bill O' Reilly On The O' Reilly Report]]
'''Bill O'Reilly''' is a commentator and host of the opinion show ''The O'Reilly Factor'' on the [[Fox News Channel]], which he calls the "No Spin Zone." O'Reilly often remarks that his personal political viewpoint is not captured by the modern [[Democratic Party|Democratic]] and [[Republican Party|Republican]] archetypes and would rather call himself a "traditionalist." In this vein, he has expressed support for some positions not traditionally associated with his political supporters including anthropogenic climate change and civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. The hosts who fill in for him, however, are all standard [[conservative]] Republicans, such as [[John Kasich]], [[Michelle Malkin]], and [[Laura Ingraham]]. ([[Tony Snow]] also had filled in a few times prior to becoming White House Press Secretary).

''The O'Reilly Factor'' is the highest-rated hours on any cable news channel. 20 million people a week watch the show and there are millions more who listen to him on radio stations. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/23/60minutes/main645202.shtml Bill O'Reilly: "No Spin"] Transcript 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace aired Sept. 26, 2004. </ref>

In October of 2004 Andrea Mackris, a former O'Reilly employee filed a sexual harrassment lawsuit alleging that the popular television host made a series of sexually explicit telephone calls to her. Bill O'Reilly countersued, alleging that Mackris attempted to extort 60 Million dollars from him. The case was eventually settled out of court and the details were kept confidential. <ref> [http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html] Copy of lawsuit filed in the State of New York. </ref>
<ref>Globe and Mail(Canada)October 30, 2004, "O'Reilly, Fox producer reach out-of-court deal."</ref>
<ref>Daily News (New York)October 29, 2004 "O'REILLY SETTLES SUIT Paying millions in sex-harassment case."</ref>
<ref>GREGORIAN, DAREH, New York Post. October 30, 2004 "THE O'SMILEY FACTOR ; ACCUSER AXED BUT $ATISFIED."</ref>
<ref>Gregorian, Dareh, New York Post. October 29, 2004 "NOW, $HUT UP! O'REILLY ACCUSER GETS CASH FOR SILENCE"</ref>

==Trivia==

* O'Reilly and [[Stephen Colbert]] have a friendly rivalry, even appearing on each others' shows.

* O'Reilly is mentioned many times in and is featured on the cover of the New York Times best selling book: ''Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them'', by [[Al Franken]].

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Oreilly, Bill}} 
[[Category:Broadcasters|Oreilly, Bill]]

Talk:Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-02T17:01:35Z

PSMax8956: New page: ==Opinion Show== It's kind of obvious that the O'Reilly factor is an opinion show, so it should stay that way.

==Opinion Show==
It's kind of obvious that the O'Reilly factor is an opinion show, so it should stay that way.

Glenn Beck

2007-08-02T17:00:28Z

PSMax8956:

[[Image:Beck glenn.jpg|right|thumb|120px]]
'''Glenn Beck''' is a moderate, talk-radio and television anchor. His radio show, The Glenn Beck Program, is syndicated by over 230 radio stations across the United States. His television show, Glenn Beck airs everyday on [[CNN]] Headline News. He also appears on ABC's Good Morning America. Glenn Beck is a [[Mormon]]. Although many liberals accuse him of being a hate-monger, including NBC anchor [[Keith Olbermann]], he is actually quite moderate, and can present his conservative arguments in a logical way.

==See Also==
:[http://www.glennbeck.com/home/index.shtml Glenn Beck's personal site]
:[http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/glenn.beck/ Glenn Beck on CNN]
{{DEFAULTSORT: Beck, Glenn}}
[[category:broadcasters]]

Bill O'Reilly

2007-08-02T16:57:41Z

PSMax8956: