Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

President Ronald Wilson Reagan

2011-10-06T22:46:31Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Ronald Wilson Reagan

#REDIRECT [[Ronald Wilson Reagan]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-10-06T22:45:52Z

RSnelik: President Reagan's An American Life

Despite many of today's non-fiction[[book| books]] being overrun by [[liberal bias]], [[liberal deceit|deceit]], and [[liberal values|distortion]], there are still some great conservative non-fiction books that promote true [[conservative values]].

#The [[The Bible|''Bible'']] - the infallible Word of [[God]], from which conservative values originate
#''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' by [[Adam Smith]] - The classic guide to [[capitalism]] and an explanation of the necessity of [[free trade]]
#''[[The Conscience of a Conservative]]'' by [[Barry Goldwater]] - describes the selfless values of [[conservatism]]
#''[[Feminist Fantasies]]'' by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] - about the deceitful, anti-[[Christian]] movement of [[feminism]]
#''[[A Choice, Not An Echo]]'' by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] - about how the anti-conservative [[liberal]] wing of the [[Republican Party]] manipulated the party's choice of nominees in the typical liberal fashion
#''[[The Burden of Bad Ideas]]'' by [[Heather MacDonald]] - how modern "intellectuals" hurt our society
#''[[McCarthy and His Enemies]]'' by [[William F. Buckley, Jr.]] and [[L. Brent Bozell Jr.]] - defends [[America|American]] [[patriot]] [[Joe McCarthy]] in his fight against [[communism|communist]] infiltration of this great country
#''[[Eat the Rich]]'' by PJ O'Rourke - An examination of the relative merits of capitalism and socialism through four case studies: Good Capitalism (USA), "Bad Capitalism" (Albania), "Good socialism" (Sweden) and Bad socialism (Cuba)
#''[[The New Answers Book]]'' by [[Ken Ham]] - gives comprehensive, biblical creationist answers to twenty-five important questions concerning the Bible and [[creation]]/[[evolution]]
#''[[An American Life]]'' by [[President Ronald Reagan]] - [[autobiography]] of a true conservative [[patriot]] and the Unites States' greatest [[president]]

[[Category: Essays about Conservatism]]

Melanie Phillips

2011-10-04T05:24:35Z

RSnelik: Obama's Muslim agenda

Melanie Phillips is a British journalist of [[Jewish]] extraction. She is an ex-liberal and is now best described as [[neo-conservative]].

She write articles for the British [[Daily Mail]] newspaper and [[Spectator]] magazine.

Her articles mainly consist of describing in detail how Britain is suffering under [[liberalism]], [[appeasement]] of [[Islamists]] and [[political correctness]]. She is also a very vocal opponent of the [[scientific fraud]]s of [[global warming]] and [[evolutionism]] and has voiced her concern for [[Muslim agenda of the Obama administration|Obama's bringing of a Muslim agenda to the United States]].

==See also==
*[[David Aaronovitch]]
*[[Nick Cohen]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Phillips, Melanie}}

[[category:authors]]
[[category:journalists]]

Pat Robertson

2011-10-03T20:50:58Z

RSnelik: DOB

'''Pat Robertson''' (b. 1938) is a [[conservative]] [[American]] [[evangelist]], [[spiritual]] leader and [[politics|political]] leader, also owner and presenter of the [[TV]] show ''[[The 700 Club]]''. Robertson sought the 1988 [[Republican]] Presidential nomination and even managed to carry [[Washington]] State in the primary caucuses by mobilizing his supporters. He also ran in 1992 and helped in the initial formation of the [[Christian Coalition]]. Robertson attacks anti-Christian bias in America and around the world and sticks up for Christian liberties.

Robertson graduated from Washington and Lee University in 1950, served in the [[Marine]]s during the [[Korean War]], then earned a law degree from [[Yale]] (1955) and a masters degree from the New York Theological Seminary (1959).<ref>http://www.infoplease.com/biography/var/patrobertson.html</ref>

In November, 2007, Robertson endorsed [[liberal]] Republican Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani for President. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,308997,00.html Fox News - Robertson endorses Giuliani]</ref>

In in 2008, Robertson appeared with [[Al Sharpton]] in a commercial urging people to fight [[global warming]].<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhmpsUMdTH8 The commercial on YouTube]</ref>

== Quotes ==

Robertson has a long history of being a prolific speaker appearing as the main host on the daily TV program The 700 Club. Over those years quite a collection of quotes have been assorted by critics, among them:

* "Just like what [[Nazi Germany]] did to the Jews, so [[liberal]] America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the [[liberal-based media]], and the [[homosexual]]s who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and [[discrimination]] and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history." <ref>Pat Robertson, interview with Molly Ivins, 1993.</ref>

* "The [[Feminism|feminist agenda]] is not about equal rights for women. It is about a [[socialist]], anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, [[abortion|kill their children]], practice [[witchcraft]], destroy capitalism, and become [[Homosexuality|lesbian]]s." <ref>Pat Robertson, fund-raising letter, 1992</ref>

* "How can there be peace when drunkards, drug dealers, [[communist]]s, [[atheist]]s, [[Occult|New Age]] worshipers of Satan, [[secular humanist]]s, oppressive dictators, greedy money changers, revolutionary assassins, [[adulterer]]s, and homosexuals are on top?" <ref>Pat Robertson, The New World Order, p.227</ref>

* "You say you're supposed to be nice to the [[Episcopalian]]s and the [[Presbyterian]]s and the [[Methodist]]s and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense! I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the [[Antichrist]]. I can love the people who hold false opinions, but I don't have to be nice to them." <ref>Pat Robertson, "The 700 Club," January 14, 1991.</ref>

* "Many of those people involved with [[Adolf Hitler]] were [[Satanist]]s, many of them were [[homosexuals]]."<ref>Pat Robertson, The 700 Club television program, January 21, 1993</ref>

* To Zambian President [[Frederick Chiluba]], who in 1991 declared [[Zambia]] "A Christian Nation:" "Your country is a a standard for not only Africa but the rest of the world...Wouldn't you love to have someone like that as president of the United States of America?...The term 'Christian nation' seems to scare a lot of people in this nation of ours, but what Chiluba said is that it gives us a yardstick to measure the performance of the government. Otherwise, we have no yardstick." (As President of Zambia, Chiluba saw to it that public schools and state-run radio and television would conform to standards of Christian principles. Among his concerns was abolishing pornography; he called upon Christian ministers and missionaries to help him in this cause.)

* "I think 'one man, one vote,' just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights."<ref>Pat Robertson, The 700 Club television program, March 18, 1992</ref> (In regard to [[South Africa]])

* "Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people may not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French –you know, Napoleon III or whatever –and they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, “We will serve you if you get us free from the French.” True story.<ref> Napoleon III was not yet born, and [[Napoleon]] was not yet in power.</ref> And so the Devil said, “Okay, it’s a deal.” … But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after the other … "<ref>http://nation.foxnews.com/culture/2010/01/13/pat-robertson-haiti-cursed-after-pact-devil</ref> (In regard to the 2010 Haiti Earthquake)

==References==

<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Robertson, Pat}}

[[category:Clergy]]
[[Category:Religion and Politics]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Christian Media]]

Lawrence O'Donnell

2011-10-03T04:50:53Z

RSnelik: liberal...

'''Lawrence O'Donnell''' is the radical [[leftist]] host of the [[MSNBC]] program ''[[The Last Word]]''. He is an ardent [[Obama]] supporter and can never seem to quite quench his thirst for incessantly bashing honest [[conservatives]]. He is well known for [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ba9KRIIik blatantly insulting] [[Orly Taitz]] when she came on his show to defend the validity of the [[Obama birth certificate controversy]].

[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Media]]

Lawrence O'Donnell

2011-10-03T04:49:47Z

RSnelik: Created page with "'''Lawrence O'Donnell''' is the radical leftist host of the MSNBC program ''The Last Word''. He is an ardent Obama supporter and can never seem to quite quench hi..."

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-10-03T02:33:29Z

RSnelik: book descriptions

Starship Troopers (film)

2011-10-03T02:02:04Z

RSnelik: bolding title, internal links, category

'''Starship Troopers''' (1997) is an over the top [[liberal]] [[parody]] of [[Robert Heinlein]]'s quintessential [[conservative]] [[science fiction]] [[novel]], featuring a two-timing girlfriend who smiles more frequently and vacantly than a Stepford Wife.

[[Category:Books]]

Secularize

2011-09-30T23:05:25Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Secular

#REDIRECT [[secular]]

Blasphemy

2011-09-30T23:04:44Z

RSnelik: blasphemy in modern society

'''Blasphemy''' is the defaming or disrespectful use of the name of [[God]], or any act which is defamatory or disrespectful to God's person.

[[Judaism]] in the [[Old Testament]] states the following about blasphemy:

<blockquote>Those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death". ([[Leviticus]] 24:16)</blockquote>

[[Christianity]] also mentions blasphemy in the [[New Testament]]

<blockquote>But whoever blasphemes against the [[Holy Spirit]] never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin. ([[Gospel of Mark|Mark]] 3:29)</blockquote> In context, this is considered to be attributing the works of God to [[Satan]]. The teachers of the law acknowledged that [[Jesus]] was curing people of evil spirits, but then accused [[Jesus]] of having the power to drive evil spirits out of people because He Himself was possessed by an evil spirit. (Mark 3:22)

A false accusation of blasphemy was the charge for which Jesus was ultimately [[crucifixion|crucified]]. Jesus spoke of Himself as the Son of God, which the [[Jew]]ish authorities, goaded by the [[Pharisee]]s, considered to be blasphemous and deserving of [[death]].

== Modern society ==
Unfortunately modern, [[secular|secularized]] society finds blasphemy of God and Jesus permissible and sometimes even encourages it. Many modern films and television programs espouse blasphemous behavior and society's [[liberal|liberals]] and [[atheism|atheists]] often promote it as if it is fun and appropriate.

== Blasphemy Laws ==
Due to the Judeo-Christian heritage of America, many states had laws against blasphemy, some of which are still on the books today.<ref>[The General Laws of Massachusetts, http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm Chapter 272, Section 36].</ref><ref>Mich. Comp. Laws [http://law.onecle.com/michigan/750-michigan-penal-code/mcl-750-102.html Section 750.102]</ref> <ref>Mich. Comp. Laws [http://law.onecle.com/michigan/750-michigan-penal-code/mcl-750-103.html Section 750.103]</ref>

In the [[United Kingdom]], blasphemy laws were abolished as part of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 <ref>http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080004_en_1</ref>

In Many [[Islamic]] countries, blasphemy was and still is punishable by death.

==Bible==
[[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 12:22-32
{{Cquote|"Then there was brought to Him a demon-possessed man who was blind and dumb, and He healed him, so that the dumb man spoke and saw. 23And all the multitudes were amazed, and began to say, "This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?" 24But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, "This man casts out demons only by Beelzebub the ruler of the demons." 25And knowing their thoughts He said to them, "Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself shall not stand. 26"And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then shall his kingdom stand? 27"And if I by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? Consequently they shall be your judges. 28"But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29"Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. 30"He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters. 31"Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32"And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come,"}}

==References==
<references/>

{{DivineComedy}}
[[Category:Sin]]

Earlobe

2011-09-29T01:59:09Z

RSnelik:

The '''earlobe''' is a part of the bottom of the [[ear]] found on some [[human|humans]] and is made of connective [[tissue]].

[[Category:Anatomy]]

Earlobe

2011-09-29T01:58:30Z

RSnelik: Created page with "The '''earlobe''' is a part of the bottom of the ear found on some humans and is made of connective tissue."

The '''earlobe''' is a part of the bottom of the [[ear]] found on some [[human|humans]] and is made of connective [[tissue]].

Bestiality and atheism

2011-09-29T01:14:43Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Atheism and bestiality

#REDIRECT [[Atheism and bestiality]]

Bestiality and Denmark, Sweden, and evolutionary belief

2011-09-29T01:13:10Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Denmark, Sweden, evolutionary belief and bestiality

#REDIRECT [[Denmark, Sweden, evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

Greatest conservative non-fiction books

2011-09-29T01:11:34Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

#REDIRECT [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books]]

NATO war in Libya

2011-09-28T01:51:31Z

RSnelik: /* Opposition of Ron Paul */ won't be mistaken for regular text now

[[File:Gaddafi and Mandela 1.JPG|thumb|right|250px|[[Nobel Peace Prize]] winner [[Nelson Mandela]] greets an old friend and ally, Muammar Gaddafi, who supported the [[ANC]] during their struggle against [[apartheid]]. ''[[Reuters]]'' reports President Obama secretly ordered support for [[al Qaeda]] terrorists seeking Gaddafi's ouster.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umgMDJIpkn0</ref>.]]
The '''Libyan War of 2011''' started as the '''Benghazi rebellion''', a series of protests in eastern [[Libya]] on February 16, 2011 after the successful uprisings in [[Tunisia]] and [[Egypt]]. The scale of violence contrasts markedly with the more peaceful uprisings that toppled the Tunisian and Egyptian regimes. The [[Islamist]] terror group [[Al-Qaeda]] in North Africa has vowed to do everything in its power to help the uprising against the Libyan [[secular]] strongman [[Muammar Gaddafi]].<ref> [http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/24/al-qaeda-in-n-africa-backs-libya-uprising-site.html Al Qaeda in N. Africa backs Libya uprising: SITE] </ref><ref> [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/mar/07/libya-uprising-live-updates Libya uprising.] </ref> Journalist David Wood has reported,
{{Cquote|Eastern Libya has been described by U.S. diplomats as a breeding ground for Islamist [[extremism]]. In diplomatic cables released by [[Wikileaks]], the region’s young men were said to have "nothing to lose" by resorting to violence. Sermons in the local [[mosque]]s are "laced with phraseology urging worshippers to support [[jihad]]," one diplomat reported.<ref>http://91.214.23.156/cablegate/wire.php?id=08TRIPOLI120&search=</ref>}}
Wood added,
{{Cquote|extremist elements make up only a portion of the resistance to Gaddafi and have been present in every popular uprising in the region stretching from the [[Iran]]ian revolution to the [[Egypt]]ian people’s overthrow of [[Hosni Mubarak]].<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html</ref>}}

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said [[jihad]]ists who fought against American troops in [[Iraq]] are on the front lines of the battle against Gaddafi's regime. <ref> [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links.] </ref> <ref> [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/25/world/guantanamo-files-libyan-detainee-now-us-ally-of-sorts.html Libyan, Once a Detainee, Is Now a U.S. Ally of Sorts.]</ref>

An international coalition intervened in what many describe as an "illegal war"<ref>http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/06/01/obamas_illegal_war</ref> led by the [[North Atlantic Treaty Organization]] (NATO), whose own leaders have openly questioned what the value, purpose, and reason for existence of NATO is. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/world/europe/14iht-letter14.html</ref><ref>http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/article_58ebd6cf-0558-5ee2-bd8d-cf27c1af7630.html</ref><ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/12/nato-usa</ref>

__TOC__
It was reported on February 24, 2011, that an emergency meeting of the [[United Nations Human Rights Council]] (UNHRC) on Libya would take no action, or make no recommendation to the [[UN General Assembly]], to remove Libya from its seat on the UN Human Rights Council, despite alleged [[human rights]] abuses.<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/no-threat-seen-libya-s-seat-top-un-human</ref> The [[United Nations Security Council]] (UNSC) then voted on March 17, 2011, to pass Security Council resolution 1973 proposed by [[France]], along with its British and Lebanese partners, initiating the use of military force in Libya. [[China]], [[Russia]], [[India]] and [[Brazil]] (the so-called BRIC nations) all abstained from the vote. The [[Obama administration]] called for Gaddafi to step aside, and has provided assistance to the insurgent tribes. US Congressional leaders were not consulted, <ref>http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262921/boehner-obama-libya-many-other-members-house-representatives-are-troubled-robert-costa</ref> nor has the United States Congress authorized any use of force in Libya.

Military and intelligence experts in France, [[Britain]], and the United States warned about uncertainties, but were overruled by political leaders. The result was a set of decisions focusing on short term considerations and gambling on the outcome. French, British, and US leaders did not fully coordinate, but according to Anthony Cordesman, it became clear,
{{Cquote|they sought and got international cover from the UN by claiming a no fly zone could protect civilians when their real objective was to use force as a catalyst to drive Gaddafi out of power.}}
[[Sarkozy]], [[David Cameron|Cameron]], and [[Obama]] seem to have assumed that a largely unknown, divided, and fractured group of insurgents could win through sheer political momentum, and could then be turned into a successful government. Within the first month it was obvious a "weak, divided, poorly led, and badly equipped and supplied set of rebel tribes can only hang on with the present level of air support" that was provided.

The assault on Libya set off a frenzy of speculations about the real motive behind the war in the oil-rich country, with many analysts saying that under the guise of protecting civilians, as enshrined in the UNSC Resolution 1973, Washington and its Western allies are basically after the North African country’s vast oil reserves. <ref>[http://2012indyinfo.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/presstv-germany-slams-nato-mission-in-libya/ Germany slams NATO mission in Libya.]</ref>

[[Stephen Lendman]]: Libya assault planned months ahead; See interview: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlSlXO_X_fE&feature=related in Youtube.]

== Libya Post Gaddafi ==
Rebel fighters with support from NATO airstrikes, overtook the capital of Tripoli and toppled the government of Libya causing Gaddafi to flee into hiding. This victory finally peaked the interests of the liberal media, who remained silent, even as the President violated the War Powers Act.

As of September 2011, a single enclave of government/tribal resistance remains and is surrounded by rebels, Gaddafi's hometown. The rebels have been recognized by the U.S. and the U.N. as the legitimate government. It remains to be seen how much money of the former regime will be released to the new government, estimated in the multi-billions. A year or longer before Libya can resume full capacity oil shipments.

Knowledgeable people agree, post Gaddafi is a big unknown. Likely, the nation will be an Islamic state. U.S. Intelligence says as many as 20,000 advanced Russian surface-to-air missiles are missing and could end up in terror groups' arsenals. <ref>[http://weaselzippers.us/2011/09/27/u-s-intelligence-now-says-up-to-20000-advanced-surface-to-air-missiles-mussing-from-libya/ U.S. Intelligence Now Says Up To 20,000 Advanced Surface-To-Air Missiles Missing From Lib, Weasel Zippers, September 27, 2011]</ref> [[Al Qaeda]] is very active in the region and the conflict. No one is sure how to rid the country of this terrorist element.

== Libya before the 2011 uprising ==
[[File:Libya Irrigation project.jpg|thumb|330px|Satellite view is showing irrigated farming projects at Al Khufrah Oasis in south-east Libya. Part of the "Great Man Made River Project" ($33 billion), where water is drawn from vast underground aquifers. This water is transported about 800 km (500 mi) to the coastal cities of Libya by means of the world's largest underground network of pipes.]]
In 1951 Libya was officially the poorest country in the world, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,864742,00.html]</ref> but by the time of the 2011 uprising, Libyans' living standards were considered the highest in Africa. The GDP per Capita was more than the double of that in Egypt, and above that of Russia. All people have access to doctors, hospitals, clinics and medicines, completely free of charge; but more than the advances in housing, agricultural, industry, health care, education, is the advance in direct popular democracy. <ref>[http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8744/libfacts.htm]</ref> [[Condoleezza Rice]] praised Libya for its "excellent co-operation" in the US-led [[war on terror]]. <ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4773617.stm] (BBC News)</ref>.
<blockquote>
The living standards of Libyans have improved significantly since the 1970s, ranking the country among the highest in Africa. Urbanization, developmental projects, and high oil revenues have enabled the Libyan government to elevate its people's living standards. The social and economic status of women and children has particularly improved. Various subsidized or free services (health, education, housing, and basic foodstuffs) have ensured basic necessities. The low percentage of people without access to safe water (3 percent), health services (0 percent) and sanitation (2 percent), and a relatively high life expectancy (70.2 years) in 1998 indicate the improved living standards. Adequate health care and subsidized foodstuffs have sharply reduced infant mortality, from 105 per 1,000 live births in 1970 to 20 per 1,000 live births in 1998. The government also subsidizes education, which is compulsory and free between the ages of 6 and 15. The expansion of educational facilities has elevated the literacy rate (78.1 in 1998). There are universities in [[Tripoli]], Benghazi, Marsa el-Brega, Misurata, Sebha, and Tobruk. <ref>[http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Africa/Libya-POVERTY-AND-WEALTH.html] (SOURCE: Handbook of the Nations; CIA World Factbook.)</ref>
</blockquote>

[[Nobel Peace Prize]] recipient [[Nelson Mandela]] warned of the machinations of outside influences in a speech noting Gaddafi and leadership in Africa:
{{Cquote|In a world where the strong may seek to impose upon the more vulnerable; and where particular nations or groups of nations may still seek to decide the fate of the planet - in such a world respect for multilateralism, moderation of public discourse and a patient search for compromise become even more imperative to save the world from debilitating conflict and enduring inequality. When we dismissed criticism of our friendship with yourself, My Brother Leader, and of the relationship between [[South Africa]] and Libya, it was precisely in defence of those values.<ref>http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71656?oid=222537&sn=Detail</ref>}}
[[File:Benghazi shopping center Libya.JPG|thumb|Benghazi shopping center.]]
At present Gaddafi is not well seen in the EU and USA but the Libyan people seem to be thriving with him as leader. A delegation of medical professionals from [[Russia]], [[Ukraine]] and [[Belarus]] wrote in an appeal to "Russian President [[Medvedev]] and Prime Minister [[Putin]] that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort". Libya today is not a highly polarized society divided between extremes of wealth and poverty.

On February 24, 2011, no threat was seen to Libya’s Seat on top U.N. Human Rights Body. A European Union-proposed draft resolution for a subsequent session “strongly condemns” human rights violations committed in Libya amid turmoil sparked by protesters, rather than condemning Gaddafi or the regime for committing them. [http://www.cnsnews.com/public/news/article/no-threat-seen-libya-s-seat-top-un-human]
<blockquote>
The "United Nations Development Program (UNDP) confirms that the country had excellent prospects for achieving United Nations development goals by 2015. NATO's war will have already dashed those hopes. A collapse like the one in Iraq now threatens the country. [http://www.newsfrommiddleeast.com/?new=77210]
</blockquote>
<center>
[[File:View to Tripoli Libya.jpg|380px|thumb|center|Tripoli, 2009.]]
</center>

==Libya under Gaddafi ==
===Petrodollars and oil===
According to a Russian article titled ''Bombing of Libya - Punishment for Qaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,'' Gaddafi initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the [[Euro]] as payment for Libya's oil, and called on [[Arab]] and African nations to use a new currency, the gold dinar. Gaddafi proposed establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. The initiative was viewed negatively in the United States and the [[European Union]], with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind. But Gaddafi continued his push for the creation of a united Africa. As early September 9, 1999, the first steps towards the formation of the [[African Union]] were taken by the Heads of State of the Organisation of African Unity.<ref>[http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/aboutau/au_in_a_nutshell_en.htm The AU in a nutshell]</ref>

In the wake of the global [[financial crisis of 2008]] forcing the United States into [[recession]], both China and Russia called for the dollar’s role in the global financial system to be diluted. Both China and the USSR abstained from UNSCR 1973.

''Bloomberg News'' reported in September 2010 that China and Russia planned to start trading in each other’s currency as the world’s second-biggest energy consumer and the largest energy supplier seek to diminish the dollar’s role in global trade. Bhanu Baweja commented {{Cquote|Given the risk to the dollar and U.S. assets from their fiscal position they want to reduce their dependence on the dollar as an invoicing currency....It makes sense for two large economies to exclude a third, overly dominant economy from their trading equation.<ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-08/china-russia-push-yuan-ruble-trading-to-diminish-dominance-of-u-s-dollar.html</ref>}}

===African Satellite Control Center===
An observer spelled out one of Gaddafi’s motivations for proposing an African Union:
{{Cquote|It began in 1992, when 45 African nations established RASCOM (Regional African Satellite Communication Organization) so that Africa would have its own satellite and slash communication costs in the continent. This was a time when phone calls to and from Africa were the most expensive in the world because of the annual US$500 million fee pocketed by Europe for the use of its satellites like Intelsat for phone conversations, including those within the same country.

An African satellite only cost a one-time payment of $400 million and the continent no longer had to pay a $500 million annual lease. Which banker wouldn't finance such a project? But the problem remained – how can [[slave]]s, seeking to free themselves from their master’s exploitation ask the master’s help to achieve that freedom? Not surprisingly, the [[World Bank]], the [[International Monetary Fund]], the USA, Europe only made vague promises for 14 years. Gaddafi put an end to these futile pleas to the western ‘benefactors’ with their exorbitant interest rates. The Libyan guide put $300 million on the table; the African Development Bank added $50 million more and the West African Development Bank a further $27 million – and that’s how Africa got its first communications satellite on 26 December 2007.<ref>http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2011/04/21/ethan-allen-qaddafi</ref>}}

===Libyan Central Bank===
In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:
{{Cquote|One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned.... Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a [[sovereign]] nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.<ref>Eric Encina,''[http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article27208.html Globalists Target 100% State Owned Central Bank of Libya,]'' Market Oracle.</ref>}}
Ellen Brown adds,
{{Cquote|Libya not only has oil. According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS (Bank of International Settlements), the IMF and their rules.<ref>Ellen Brown, ''[http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/289-134/5625-libya-all-about-oil-or-all-about-banking Libya: All About Oil, or All About Banking,]'' Reader Supported News, April 15, 2011.</ref>}}
Gaddafi’s proposal to introduce a gold dinar for Africa contravenes IMF rules and is designed to bypass them.

=== Italian Friendship treaty ===
"We signed a friendship treaty with Libya, that includes a non-aggression clause, but when the counterpart '''no longer exists''' — in this case the Libyan state — the treaty cannot be applied”, said [[Italy]]’s foreign minister, Franco Frattini on February 26, 2011, ten days after the uprising began.
{{Cquote|Italy’s treaty with Libya, signed by Prime Minister [[Silvio Berlusconi]] in August 2008, calls on Italy to pay Libya $5 billion over 20 years in reparations for its colonial past there. In return, Libya pledged to help block the flow of illegal immigrants to Italy and grant favorable treatment for Italian companies seeking to do business in Libya. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/28/world/europe/28military.html]</ref>}}

==French intervention==

A report from Congressman [[Dennis Kucinich]] corroborated the claim of Franco Bechis<ref>''[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:RkUoFsgEwm8J:www.voltairenet.org/article169069.html+French+plans+to+topple+Gaddafi+on+track+since+last+November&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com French plans to topple Gaddafi on track since last November]'', by Franco Bechis, VoltaireNet, March 26, 2011.</ref> in Italy that "plans to spark the Benghazi rebellion were initiated by French intelligence services in November 2010."<ref>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24347</ref>

On March 10, 2011, France became the first and only country to recognize the Libyan Transitional National Council “as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people.”<ref> “Sarkozy’s Libyan Surprise,” ''The Economist'', March 14, 2011.</ref> "France recognizes states, not parties", said a senior official on March 9th. After a meeting arranged by [[Bernard Henri Levy|Bernard-Henri Lévy]] the next morning, on March 10th, two representatives of the Libyan opposition emerged from President Sarkozys office at the Elysée Palace to announce that "France recognizes the Libyan Transitional National Council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people". <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/world/africa/02levy.html?_r=2</ref><ref>http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2011/03/france_and_libya</ref>

On March 19, two days after passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1973,<ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=278685</ref> French President [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] convened an emergency meeting of allied and Arab leaders in [[Paris]] which endorsed the immediate deployment of military aircraft to attack Gaddafi forces defending Benghazi and establish a no-fly zone. Before the end of the meeting, French fighter planes were attacking armored vehicles and tanks outside Benghazi. Some participants at the Paris meeting were critical of the French government, both for insisting on convening the meeting before agreeing to endorse air strikes, and then for launching air strikes before the meeting was over.<ref>Allies Open Air Assault on Qaddafi’s Forces in Libya, ''New York Times'', March 19, 2011.</ref> French officials claim that meeting participants were informed of the operation beforehand. The strikes had clearly been planned and coordinated with the [[United States]] and some other NATO forces.<ref>Operation Odyssey Dawn (Libya): Background and Issues for Congress, ''Congressional Research Service'', March 30, 2011, p. 19 pd.</ref>

[[National Public Radio]] (NPR) reported Sarkozy enjoyed a "burst of public support"<ref>http://wap.npr.org/story/134855539</ref> while the ''[[London Guardian]]'' wrote Sarkozy's actions may save him from "electoral humiliation."<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/20/libya-crisis-nicolas-sarkozy-electoral</ref> Several analysts speculate Sarkozy used the crisis to propel France into a Superpower role, usurping the global leadership of the United States abrogated by [[President Obama]].<ref>http://www.businessandpolitics.org/?p=4651</ref> Columnist Jim Hoagland of the ''[[Washington Post]]'' observes,
{{Cquote|France is a country that has a past being involved in world affairs, wanting to count in world affairs, and being willing to pay its way for defense forces and to use those forces abroad. So, France plays a natural role in that. At a time when governments are slashing defense spending and reducing troops, France still wants to occupy an important role in world affairs....the reason you're seeing France taking on such a much larger role is that other countries, including the United States, are not willing to do it anymore. And Sarkozy is trying to fill that vacuum.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june11/france2_04-07.html</ref>}}

Sarkozy's approval rating stood at 30% prior to the intervention.

===Legality of French actions===
On May 29 two French lawyers, Roland Dumas and Jacques Vergès, announced plans to initiate legal proceedings against President [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] for crimes against humanity over the [[NATO]] led campaign in [[Libya]]. Dumas (who also served as a foreign minister under President [[François Mitterrand]]) said that the NATO mission, which was meant to protect civilians, is in fact killing them.<ref>http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=46395</ref> On July 4 a French lawyer, Marcel Ceccaldi, called for investigation of the International Criminal Court on NATO "war crimes". [http://www.lemonde.fr/libye/article/2011/07/04/libye-un-avocat-demande-une-enquete-de-la-cpi-sur-les-crimes-de-guerre-de-l-otan_1544755_1496980.html]

== National Transitional Council ==
The National Transitional Council of the Libyan Republic announced its official establishment in early March 2011 in the city of Benghazi. The stated goal was to the overthrow of Mu’ammar Gaddafi.<ref>http://ntclibya.org/english/</ref> It has been recognized by France, [[Qatar]], Italy, [[Kuwait]], [[Maldives]] and [[Gambia]]. They have proceeded to form a transitional government for the post-Gaddafi era. Before forming a government, they robbed about $505 million from the Central Bank of Libya in Benghazi.
[[File:Libya Rebels Gaining Momentum.jpg|thumb|Anti-Gaddafi tribal insurgents in March, 2011 (Photo:Reuters).]]
{{Cquote|The top leaders of the “revolutionary” masses in Benghazi are two recent defectors of what the Left dubs Gaddafi’s “murderous regime”, Mustafa Abdul Jalil a former Justice minister (who prosecuted dissenters up to the day before the armed uprising), Mahmoud Jebril a top Gaddafite neo-liberal prominent in inviting multi-nationals to take over the oil fields (FT, March 23, 2011, p. 7) and Ali Aziz al-Eisawa, Gaddafi’s former ambassador to India who jumped ship when it looked like the uprising would succeed. These self-appointed leaders of the “rebels” are staunch backers of Euro-US military intervention just as they previously were long-term backers of Gaddafi’s dictatorship and promoters of MNC takeovers of oil and gas fields. The heads of the “rebels” military council is Omar Hariri and General Abdul Fattah Younis former head of the Ministry of Interior, both with long histories (since 1969) of repressing any democratic movements.<ref>http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/euro-us-war-on-libya-official-lies-and-misconceptions-of-critics/</ref>}}
The root base of the armed uprising is Benghazi, a hotbed of tribal backers and clients of the deposed King Idris.

===Misuse of humanitarian assistance===

In May, 2011, NATO and Arab countries agreed in Rome to set up a fund to manage donations to help areas controlled by the rebels; they announced a financial mechanism to assist the opposition in Libya. This would include a partial unfreezing of Libyan assets in banks that would go into a temporary fund managed by the U.N. Sanctions Committee. And it would be intended to help the rebels with their immediate needs to cover food, medicine and hospital costs;<ref>http://www.npr.org/2011/05/05/136011941/diplomats-discuss-aid-to-libyan-rebels</ref> The insurgents would gain access to a special $3 billion (£1.8 billion) trust fund established by its Western backers to finance the breakaway regions fighting against Gaddafi;<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8492745/Libyan-rebels-to-receive-1.8-billion-trust-fund.html</ref> but the Transitional National Council is planing to use money pledged for humanitarian and reconstruction purposes to buy weapons.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/amnesty-international-accuses-gaddafi-regime-of-war-crimes-in-misurata/2011/05/06/AFbPjw6F_story.html?hpid=z2</ref>
[[File:Rebel fighters hoist the former Libyan monarchy flag on the outskirts of Benghazi.jpg|thumb|Rebel fighters hoist the former Libyan monarchy flag on the outskirts of Benghazi. Modern urbanization and equipments may be clearly seen there.]]

===Insurgent Death Squads===

Insurgent tribal leaders created a wanted list and placed suspects under round-the-clock surveillance. Secret militia units raid houses without court warrants and often interrogate suspects for hours. Those released have to sign a document stating their loyalty to the revolution. As many as 30 civilians are being held at various rebel military bases around Benghazi without due process of law, said human rights activists, judges and prosecutors. In recent weeks, at least seven former members of the internal security police have turned up dead, their bodies riddled with bullets. Although it is not known who killed them, many suspect that they died at the hands of rebel-affiliated death squads. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/libyan-rebels-accused-of-reprisal-attacks/2011/05/20/AFaeAh8G_story.html?hpid=z4]

On May, 26, the deputy leader of Libya's rebel administration said it could take up to two years to organize elections, backtracking on promises of a six-month transition to democracy. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110526/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_libya]

==Security Council Res. 1973 and NATO==
UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1973 of March 17, 2011 followed on the heels of Gaddafi’s public announcement on March 2 he may throw western oil companies out of Libya, and his invitation on March 14 to Chinese, Russian, and Indian firms to produce Libyan oil in their place.<ref>''[http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/3/12/7661/Business/Economy/Gaddafi-offers-Libyan-oil-production-to-India,-Rus.aspx Gaddafi offers Libyan oil production to India, Russia, China,] Agence France-Presse, March 14, 2011.</ref> China, Russia, India and Brazil all abstained on UNSC Resolution 1973.

Despite France taking the lead role in the intervention, the Congressional Research Service reports, "Only the United States and NATO possess the command and control capabilities necessary for coalition operations enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya." France only recently rejoined the NATO alliance, in 2008, after a 40 year absence. The Congressional Research Service, which analyzes information and prepares reports for members of Congress, also states,
{{Cquote|In spite of statements underscoring NATO unity on steps announced to date, the initial planning and operational phases were also marked by significant levels of discord within Europe and [[NATO]] on the aims and future direction of the mission. A key point of contention was reportedly the amount of flexibility that NATO forces would be granted to protect civilians and civilian areas, as called for in paragraph 4 of UNSCR 1973. Reports indicate that French officials insisted on maintaining the ability to strike ground forces that threatened civilian areas, while their [[Turkish]] counterparts vocally opposed any targeting of ground forces. Adding to the strain within NATO, NATO ally [[Germany]] abstained from UNSCR 1973 and, opposed to any potential [[combat]] operation, on March 23, withdrew its naval assets in the [[Mediterranean]] from NATO command. Throughout the first week of operations, other European allies contributing to the mission, including Italy and Norway, expressed increasing frustration with the lack of agreement within NATO, with Norway refusing to deploy its fighter jets unless under they were under NATO command and control.<ref>Operation Odyssey Dawn (Libya):
Background and Issues for Congress, ''Congressional Research Service,'' March 30, 2011, p. 20 pdf.</ref>}}

Of NATO's 28 members, 14 are said to be "actively participating," but only 6 provided military support. By June Norway announced its intention to quit the coalition<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/norway-quit-libya-operation-august</ref> and French and British leaders expressed concerns over being able to meet the costs of a war they dragged the United States into.<ref>http://hosted2.ap.org/COGRA/2e515285f07040df999bd6b670db791c/Article_2011-06-14-EU-NATO-Libya/id-f6d2287c00ba4816924c082ed9cc12fa</ref> Of the 22-country [[Arab League]], whose appeal prompted the United Nations to vote on intervention, only [[Qatar]] and the [[United Arab Emirates]] are involved. Of the 192 members of the [[UN General Assembly]], who all have a legal "responsibility to protect" civilians attacked by their own governments, only [[Sweden]] has responded.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/19/libya-mission-military-advisory-team</ref> After the authorization and commitment of NATO and U.S. forces, Secretary Gates announced,
{{Cquote|The mightiest military alliance in history is only 11 weeks into an operation against a poorly armed regime in a sparsely populated country, yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the U.S., once more, to make up the difference.}}
and warned
{{Cquote|The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress—and in the American body politic writ large—to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense.<ref>http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/06/10/robert_gates_nato_defense_secretary_questions_future_of_the_alli.html</ref>}}

===Exceeding UN mandate===
Resolution 1973 authorized strict limitations, according to international law, on NATO as the organization with responsibility for the implementation of the resolution. Particularly, it provides only for a naval blockade enforcing the arms embargo, and enforcement of a no-fly zone. On March 29, 2011, Russian envoy Dmitry Rogozin commented after a meeting with NATO officials in [[Brussels, Belgium]], that Russia expressed deep concern over the interpretation of the Security Council’s resolution, as some countries have effectively turned it into an approval for ground operations.
{{Cquote|[[Moscow]] has many questions about how the UN Security Council’s resolution is being carried out...First of all, there are reports that civilians have been killed in the air strikes. This is odd if you consider the message of the resolution, which says that the foreign forces’ actions should protect civilians. So it’s hard to comprehend how you can protect civilians by killing them....we demanded that the UN Security Council be fully informed about the actions of the alliance in Libya at all times... We have reports of air strikes against convoys far from the front line. This is a far cry from the UN Security Council resolution.<ref>http://rt.com/news/coalition-libya-nato-russian-envoy/</ref>}}
[[File:Bombing Tripoli Libya.jpg|right|Bombing Tripoli, Libya.]]
NATO planes and ships have been striking cities and military installations in Libya since mid-March, 2011. Allied military officials have spoken in recent weeks of the need for escalation to help protect Libyan civilians and have called for Gaddafi to step down. Libyan officials have said that NATO is picking sides in a civil war and complained that strikes on Gaddafi’s Tripoli compound are attempts to assassinate the leader of a sovereign country. NATO launched its largest airstrike against Moammar Gaddafi’s regime on May, 24, 2011, with at least 15 massive explosions rocking the Libyan capital. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/french-officials-france-and-britain-to-use-attack-helicopters-in-libya/2011/05/23/AFTF909G_story.html?hpid=z2]
<blockquote>
On May 15, two months into the NATO bombing campaign against loyal Gaddafi’s forces, Britain’s top military commander said that the Libyan leader could remain “clinging to power” unless NATO broadened its bombing targets to include the country’s infrastructure. <ref>http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html</ref>
</blockquote>

The French and the British described plans for a wargames exercise for an attack on Libya last November, in the end they used those military assets that had been mobilized for the real thing 3 months ago. We know that NATO doesn’t just go and bomb a country over night, these things are planned far in advance, and in this case there is conclusive evidence that there have been plans for this for many many years. <ref> [https://lizziesliberation.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/letter-from-libya-to-a-close-friend/ Letter from Libya to a close friend] June 4, 2011. </ref>
<blockquote>
On Jun 18, Prime minister of Libya Al-Baghdadi al-Mahmoudi accused [[NATO]] of a "new level of aggression" over the past 72 hours in which he said the military alliance intentionally targeted civilian buildings, including a hotel and a university. "It has become clear to us that NATO has moved on to deliberately hitting civilian buildings. ... This is a crime against humanity," he told reporters in the capital. Libya's Health Ministry released new casualty figures that put the number of civilians killed in NATO air strikes through to June 7 at 856. <ref> [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/gaddafi-rages-at-nato-after-bombing-2299509.html Gaddafi rages at NATO after bombing.] </ref>
</blockquote>
[[File:Women with Gaddafi Libya.jpg|thumb|280px|Lizzie Cocker with mum and two daughters from Sudan who have been living in Libya for 17 years. They had to flee from Misrata to Tripoli following the vicious atrocities committed by the pro-NATO rebels against black skinned peoples. They are firmly standing behind their leader Moammar Gadaffi. The sisters have written on the poster, on the left: "King of Kings of Africa" and on the right: "Our souls are for you".]]
==== Italy - Berlusconi ====
[[Italy]] called for a suspension of hostilities in [[Libya]] on June 22 in the latest sign of dissent within [[NATO]] as the civilian death toll mounts and [[Muammar Gaddafi]] shows no signs of quitting power. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110622/ts_afp/libyaconflictnatoitalydiplomacy]

===African response to UN & NATO intervention===
NATO's Libyan intervention has proven fractious in black Africa; in March [[Nigeria]]'s Foreign Minister Odein Ajumogobia commented, "The contradictions between principle and national interest ... have enabled the international community to impose a no-fly zone over Libya ostensibly to protect innocent civilians from slaughter, but to watch seemingly helplessly (in [[Ivory Coast]]) as ...men, women and children are slaughtered in equally, even if less egregious, violence."<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-503543_162-503543.html?keyword=ivory+coast</ref>
<blockquote>
Amr Moussa, the outgoing head of the Arab League and a front runner to become president of a democratic Egypt, has voiced reservations about NATO's bombing campaign in Libya, calling for a ceasefire and talks on a political settlement while Muammar Gaddafi remains in power. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/21/arab-league-chief-libya-air-strikes]
</blockquote>
The Arab League, which in March asked the United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone over Libya to protect civilians, condemned the loss of life in bombing incidents.
<blockquote>
"When the Arab League agreed on the idea of having a no-fly zone over Libya it was to protect civilians but when civilians get killed this has to be condemned with the harshest of statements," said Deputy Secretary-General Ahmed Ben Helli.
</blockquote>
The Libyan leader says the Western-led military campaign is an act of colonial aggression designed to steal Libya's oil. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110620/wl_nm/us_libya]

==United States intervention==
[[File:Treaty of Tripoli PD LC.jpg|thumb|Treaty of Tripoli, Libya was one of the first nation to recognize the US in 1796.]]
===Frozen assets===
President Obama moved swiftly to support French plans to frustrate Gaddafi’s proposal for an African Union with his unilateral declaration of a national emergency in order to freeze all of the Bank of Libya’s $30 billion of funds to which America had access. This was reported in the U.S. press as a freeze of the funds of "Colonel Qaddafi, his children and family, and senior members of the Libyan government.<ref>''New York Times'', February 27, 2011.</ref> The second section of Obama’s decree explicitly targeted "All property and interests… of the Government of Libya, its agencies, instrumentalities, and controlled entities, and the Central Bank of Libya.<ref>Executive Order of February 25, 2011, citing International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, seizes all Libyan Govt assets, February 25, 2011, link. The authority granted to the President by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act "may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared for purposes of this chapter and may not be exercised for any other purpose" (50 U.S.C. 1701).</ref> The consequences of the $30-billion freeze for [[Africa]], as well as for Libya, have been spelled out by an African observer:
{{Cquote|The US$30 billion frozen by Mr Obama belong to the Libyan Central Bank and had been earmarked as the Libyan contribution to three key projects which would add the finishing touches to the African federation – the African Investment Bank in Syrte, Libya, the establishment in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund to be based in Yaounde with a US$42 billion capital fund and the Abuja-based African Central Bank in Nigeria which when it starts printing African money will ring the death knell for the CFA franc through which Paris has been able to maintain its hold on some African countries for the last fifty years. It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi.}}

===War Powers Act===

Under the [[War Powers Act]] of 1973 the U.S President has limited authority to use military force without Congressional authorization when there is an imminent [[national security]] threat, however President Obama made clear that he ordered the use of force for other reasons. Members of Congress of both parties have expressed concern the President may have violated the law in doing so.<ref>http://rooney.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3190:rooney-resolution-president-should-obtain-congressional-authorization-or-end-military-campaign-in-libya-&catid=48:2011-press-releases</ref> The War Powers Act specifically states that the President’s power to introduce forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities can only be exercised pursuant to (1) a declaration of war; (2) specific statutory authorization; or (3) a national emergency created by an attack on the United States or its forces. The War Powers Act requires the President in every possible instance to consult with Congress before introducing American Armed Forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities unless there has been a declaration of war or other specific Congressional authorization. None of these prerequisites have been met.

On March 21, 2011, President Obama publicly announced U.S. military forces commenced no fly-zone operations in Libya two days earlier, on March 19, "to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe" and cited UN Resolutions as giving him the authority to do so. Secretary of Defense [[Robert Gates]] warned establishment of a no-fly zone meant attacking Libaya.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20038391-503544.html</ref> Officials as National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough also opposed to attacking Libya; but "[[Hillary Clinton]] won the bureaucratic battle to use DOD resources to achieve what's essentially the State Department's objective... and Obama let it happen". <ref>[http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/18/how_obama_turned_on_a_dime_toward_war How Obama turned on a dime toward war.] </ref> The Charter of the [[United Nations]], in Article 2(4), prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence” of a member state, and many observers have wondered whether the establishment of a no-fly zone would constitute a violation of this prohibition. The Congressional Research Services advised that a no-fly zone imposed against a state that has not carried out an attack on its neighbors may consider the imposition of a no-fly zone an “armed attack.” CRS warned that even if no-fly zone operations in a given state do not constitute an “armed attack",
{{Cquote|that state, and other members of the international community, might consider them a violation of the prohibition of the “threat or use of force,” as well as of the customary duty of non-intervention in the affairs of other sovereign states.}}

NATO's Supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee days before President Obama publicly admitted to intervention that U.S. intelligence knew of [[al Qaeda]] and [[Hezbollah]] elements among the Libyan insurgents.<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8414583/Libya-al-Qaeda-among-Libya-rebels-Nato-chief-fears.html</ref> A document published by the U.S. [[West Point]] Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Center reveals that Libya sent more fighters to the [[Operation_Iraqi_Freedom#InsurgencyIraq|Islamic insurgency]] than any other [[Muslim]] country (from eastern Libya, from the towns of Surt, Misurata and Darnah.).<ref>[http://www.ctc.usma.edu/harmony/pdf/CTCForeignFighter.19.Dec07.pdf The Sinjar documents], a collection of al Qaeda computer data captured by Americans in 2007 in a predawn raid near Sinjar, Iraq, six miles from the Syrian border. The documents included background information on around 750 foreign fighters, who migrated to Iraq to kill American soldiers, many of those fighters coming from among the very people we are now pledging to protect. David Wood wrote: "Almost one in five foreign fighters arriving in Iraq came from eastern Libya, from the towns of Surt, Misurata and Darnah. On a per capita basis, that’s more than twice as many than came from any other Arabic-speaking country, amounting to what the counter terrorism center called a Libyan “surge” of young men eager to kill Americans."</ref> This set off a fierce debate in the [[Obama administration]] over the wisdom of arming terrorists.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/world/africa/30diplo.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss</ref> It is now known however, that sometime prior to March 31, 2011,<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/africa/31intel.html?_r=2&hp</ref> President Obama signed a secret Presidential Finding authorizing support for the insurgents.<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330</ref> Direct arms support would violate the arms embargo imposed by UN Security Council Resolution 1970 on February 26, 2011.<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330</ref>

Public opinion initially was divided on support for President Obama's actions, within 30 days however, opposition rose 15%<ref>http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/americans-rapidly-turn-against-obama-over-handling-of-libyan-intervention.php</ref> as the reality of the intervention set in.

===Legality of U.S. military actions===
The ''[[Washington Post]]'' reported on May 20, 2011 President Obama missed the legal deadline set in the 1973 law that required him to obtain Congressional approval for U.S. military operations in Libya. Under the [[Nixon]]-era War Powers Resolution, the president must obtain Congressional authorization of military action within 60 days, or else begin withdrawing forces.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-likely-to-miss-deadline-for-congressional-approval-of-libya-operations/2011/05/19/AFFLKn7G_story.html</ref> Sen. [[Richard Lugar]] of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations warned President Obama,
[[File:NATO strike Libya.jpg|right|220px|NATO strike, Libya.]]
{{Cquote|U.S. military operations in Libya have assumed a different character than you suggested when you announced the decision to initiate them. In your March 21 letter to the Congress, you indicated that these operations would be limited in their nature, duration, and scope, and focused on protecting civilians and civilian populated areas from attack. Two months into these operations, your Administration is unable to specify what limits will apply to the duration of the operations, and the coalition in which we are participating appears to have expanded its objectives to weakening the Gaddafi regime’s hold on power through strikes on leadership targets and, potentially, infrastructure targets.<ref>http://lugar.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332967&</ref><ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-obama-above-the-law/2011/05/26/AGL5zyCH_story.html</ref>}}

The evidence is President Obama’s war in Libya is illegal and unconstitutional. Columnist George Will laid out the case in, “Is Obama Above the Law?” The war is a violation of the War Powers Act, which says the president can go to war without Congressional approval only if there is an imminent threat to the U.S. and there is a 60-day deadline for the withdrawal of forces. [http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=2467]

The law states that “The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to

(1) a declaration of war,

(2) specific statutory authorization, or

(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States , its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”

Since there was no declaration of war or statutory authorization for the Libya action, there has to be a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S. There was none in the Libya case.<ref>http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=2458 Conservative Truth.</ref> A [[bipartisan]] group of legislators have begun action against what they percieve to be President Obama's unconstitutional misuse of power.<ref>http://thehill.com/homenews/house/166577-kucinich-jones-sue-white-house-over-libya-war</ref>

=== 10 Reasons to Oppose the War in Libya ===

According to Rep. [[Dennis Kucinich]]:

* '''It is unconstitutional''', violating Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution which gives the power of declaring war to the Congress.
* '''It is illegal''', as the War Powers Resolution was exploited out of context in order to declare war.
* '''American public opinion is against it''', as 6 Americans out of 10 oppose the war.
* It '''distracts''' the President from more immediate concerns, such as the dire state of the economy.
* It '''costs''' funds that should be used for other purposes.
* Although the war was declared by Britain and France, '''America is paying more than other NATO allies'''.
* '''Civilians are being killed''' by the same powers that are supposed to protect them.
* '''The U.N. Resolution that authorized limited military action did not allow for regime change'''
* '''Public support of the war is eroding even in other allied countries.'''
* '''The situation is a stalemate''' that ought to be solved by political, not military means.

See more at: [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-dennis-kucinich/10-reasons-to-oppose-the_b_881554.html 10 Reasons to Oppose the War in Libya.]

=== Opposition of [[Ron Paul]] ===

<blockquote>
''"Why did the US intervene in a civil war in a country that has neither attacked us nor poses a threat? We are told this was another humanitarian intervention, like Clinton’s 1999 war against [[Serbia]]. But as civilian victims of the US-led coalition bombing continue to add up, it is getting difficult to determine whether the problem we are creating on the ground is worse than the one we were trying to solve."'' [http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-03-28/ron-paul-end-the-libyan-war/]
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
''"Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit, explained in a recent article that there is plausible reason to believe the rebels are current or former Islamist mujahedin, eager to engage in jihad. Indeed, Gaddafi has fought against Libyan Islamists for years and is seen by them as a bitter enemy. Astoundingly, it may well be that we are assisting al Qaeda in this new war! [[Ibidem]]"''
</blockquote>

==Role of China==
In the first decade of the Twenty-first century China quietly has overtaken the United States to become Africa's largest trading partner, particularly in oil, which accounts for 73 percent of all African exports. According to the Chinese government's first white paper on its economic and trade cooperation with Africa, China's trade with Africa has soared to $114.81 billion in the first 11 months of 2010. China uses about 8 million barrels per day (bpd), a demand that is projected to rise to 11.3 million bpd by 2015 and now receives 28 percent of its oil imports from Africa. China's top oil suppliers are [[Saudi Arabia]], [[Iran]], [[Angola]], Russia, [[Oman]] and [[Sudan]]. Saudi Arabia is China's top oil supplier (1.1 million bpd.) China is also buying oil from [[Chad]], [[Gabon]] and [[Nigeria]] as well. China's top African oil suppliers are [[Angola]], [[Sudan]] and [[Nigeria]]. The [[International Monetary Fund]] reports, oil now accounts for 99 percent of Sudanese exports, with China absorbing for 65 percent of them. Energy is Angola's sole export hard currency earner, with China now accounting for 35 percent of Angolan exports.<ref>http://mammutcapital.blogspot.com/2011/06/upcoming-us-china-struggle-for-african.html</ref>

===Competition for resources===
After hostilities began China evacuated over 36,000 of its energy and construction workers and shut down operations of Chinese companies with over $18.8 billion of Chinese investments in Libya.<ref>http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/eastasia/view/1119924/1/.html</ref> China alone is expected to invest on a scale of $50 billion a year in Libya and Africa by 2015, a figure - funded by America’s [[trade deficit]] with China - which the Western powers and NATO cannot match.<ref>Leslie Hook, ''China’s future in Africa, after Libya,'' March 4, 2011. The U.S trade deficit with China in 2010 was $273 billion.</ref> China, Libya's largest Asian oil customer, called for an immediate ceasefire.

Dr. [[Paul Craig Roberts]], former Assistant Secretary of US Treasury in the [[Reagan administration]] observed the joint French, British, and US coalition's objective is
{{Cquote|to eliminate China from the [[Mediterranean]]. China has extensive energy investments and construction investments in Libya. They are looking to Africa as a future energy source. The US is countering this by organizing the United States African Command (USAC), which Qaddafi refused to join. So that's the second reason for the Americans to want Qaddafi out.}}
Roberts observes
{{Cquote| the protests in Libya are different from the ones in Egypt or [[Yemen]] or [[Bahrain]] or [[Tunisia]] and the difference is that this is an armed rebellion...these protests originated in the eastern part of Libya where the oil is - they did not originate in the capital city. And we have heard from the beginning credible reports that the CIA is involved in the protests, and there have been a large number of press reports that the CIA has sent back to Libya its Libyan asset<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/26/111109/new-rebel-leader-spent-much-of.html</ref> to head up the Libyan rebellion... China has 50 major investment projects in eastern Libya.<ref>http://www.presstv.ir/detail/175076.html</ref>}}

Whatever Washington’s ulterior motives, there is no doubt that NATO’s military operations in Libya are harming China’s fiscal interests. According to information from China’s Ministry of Trade, by March, when the military operation began, there were 75 major Chinese companies operating in Libya, and they had concluded $18 billion in contracts. Because of the NATO operations in Libya, the Chinese companies are expecting gigantic losses. <ref> [http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ Washington Using NATO For Proxy Conflict With China In Libya.] </ref>

==Mission creep==
UN Security Council Resolution 1973, passed in March 2011, does not authorise participating members to support the anti-Gaddafi tribes, to defend armed groups, or to oust Gaddafi. Nor does it authorise a ground invasion or military occupation. Strategic analyst Anthony Cordesman notes the similarities between Libya and Iraq and the loose uncoordinated coalitions "failure to plan for the decisive and lasting use of force, failure to plan for the civil side of military operations and to support stability operations, and focus on short term goals without a realistic plan for a successful strategic and post-conflict outcome." Cordesman notes,
{{Cquote|the lives and futures of some 6.6 million Libyans are at stake. The Franco-Anglo-American gamble now seems far too likely to fail at their expense. Moreover, it seems likely to drag the other nations that support the operation into their failure -- along with part of the reputation of NATO and credibility of the UN.... gambling on Qaddafi caving in has created a far more serious humanitarian crisis for the Libyan people than would ever have occurred if the Coalition had acted decisively from the start ...The humanitarian cost of humanitarian restraint is all too clear: Hundreds of Libyan and foreign workers have been killed...hundreds of thousands lack jobs, security, and safe conditions of life....an enduring war of attrition will turn a minor humanitarian crisis into a major one ...This kind of operation cannot be “surgical’ – if “surgical” now means minimizing bloodshed regardless of whether the patient dies. Hard, and sometimes brutal, choices need to be made between limited civilian casualties and collateral damage during the decisive use of force and an open-ended war of attrition that will produce far higher cumulative civilian casualties and collateral damage.<ref>http://csis.org/publication/libya-will-farce-stay-us-and-france-and-britain</ref>}}
Cordesman notes mission creep and boots on the ground ultimately lead to [[nation building]]:
{{Cquote|France, Britain, and the US now have a special obligation to both finish what they started in military terms, and deal with the aftermath. A post-conflict Libya will need extensive help in building a workable political system, in rebuilding the capability to govern, in both rebuilding the existing economy and correcting for decades of Qaddafi’s reckless and constantly shifting eccentricities.}}
On April 19, 2011, one month after Sarkozy, Cameron, and Obama asked the UN Security Council for authorization for a limited use of force, the UK ''[[Guardian (UK)|Guardian]]'' reported,
{{Cquote|Britain is now publicly doing what it expressly said it would not do when the no-fly intervention began: putting boots on the ground in Libya. France is taking similar action. Given that the rebel tribes have convincingly demonstrated their inability to win on their own, given the sizable negatives for David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy of an open-ended, inconclusive conflict, and given Barack Obama's flat refusal to do any more, the question now is: how many more British and French boots will follow, sooner or later, in the advisers' fateful footsteps?....By encouraging and assisting rebel resistance, as [[George H. W. Bush|George Bush Snr]] did with the [[Shia]]s of southern [[Iraq]] in 1991, Britain and France risk worsening the plight of the Libyan civilians they are primarily pledged to defend. The UN and concerned aid agencies all agree the humanitarian situation is growing steadily worse, the longer the conflict continues. ..<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/19/libya-mission-military-advisory-team</ref>}}

<blockquote>
Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, in particular, has been scathing about Western intervention in Libya, comparing the Resolution 1973 to “a medieval call to the crusades” and saying “the so-called civilized community, with all its might, pounces on a small country, and ruins infrastructure that has been built over generations.” Mr. Putin returned to the subject of Libya repeatedly, despite acknowledging that foreign policy decisions were not within his portfolio as prime minister. [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/28/world/europe/28russia.html?hp]
</blockquote>

===Manufacturing Consent===

"On how the western media makes the case for war. Our consent has been manufactured by the criminalization of Gaddafi and his government, and the Libyan people cannot believe it when I tell them what is said about him in the west. And if only you could see how they live, they are far more free than us in England in many ways, this does not fit in with the oppressive image of Gaddafi portrayed in the west.

So for example, I have had Libyans coming up to me asking me about a report in the popular French newspaper Le Figaro that came out about 3 days ago saying 10,000 people have been killed in Tripoli over the past 3 months by government forces. They are astonished, because this is complete and utter lies. " [https://lizziesliberation.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/letter-from-libya-to-a-close-friend/ Letter from Libya to a close friend.]

==External links==
*[http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/03/in-arming-libyan-rebels-the-us-would-follow-an-old-dark-path/73019/ In Arming Libyan Rebels, the U.S. Would Follow an Old, Dark Path.]
[[File:Tripoli NATO bombing Libya.jpg|thumb|280px|Tripoli, NATO bombing.]]
*[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/americas-secret-plan-to-arm-libyas-rebels-2234227.html America's secret plan to arm Libya's rebels.] ''The Independent'', UK.
*[http://www.sott.net/articles/show/225613-Operation-Libya-The-US-NATO-Attempted-Coup-d-Etat-in-Libya-and-the-Battle-for-Oil "Operation Libya": The US-NATO Attempted Coup d'Etat in Libya and the Battle for Oil.]
*[http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2055251,00.html Why Libya's Uprising Is Bad for the World Economy.]
*[http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-14/bostonglobe/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions False pretense for war in Libya?]
*[http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/19/libya-nato-civil-war-cameron These humanitarians come to Libya with missiles, and an agenda.] by [[Simon Jenkins]].
*[http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=24188 The West's War Against Gaddafi. Yet another long-lasting, tragic crime against humanity.]
*[http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obama%E2%80%99s-war-in-libya-is-illegal-and-unconstitutional/ Obama’s War in Libya is Illegal and Unconstitutional.] by Cliff Kincaid.
*[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/30/us-libya-school-idUSTRE73T24620110430 Libya disabled children school hit in NATO strike.] Reuters.
*[http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2011/06/08/natos-alternate-universe-in-libya.html NATO's "Alternate Universe" in Libya.]
*[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/reese-schonfeld/are-the-lessons-of-kosovo_b_868281.html Are The Lessons of Kosovo Spreading to Libya?]
*[http://www.lemonde.fr/libye/article/2011/06/22/le-patron-de-la-ligue-arabe-fait-part-de-scrupules-sur-la-libye_1539111_1496980.html#ens_id=1481986 The head of the Arab League expressed "qualms" about Libya.] In French.
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx3UAWau9T8&%20NR=1 George Galloway talks about Libya war.] Youtube

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Libya]]
[[category:Africa]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:War]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Conservative Dictionary Project (A)

2011-09-28T01:25:08Z

RSnelik: false liberal redefinition

:'''[[Abstinence]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - Choosing to remain true to one's [[values]] and refraining from sexual behaviour until [[marriage]]
:''False liberal redefinition''- Denying one's true [[sin|impulses]]

:'''[[Ad Hominem]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - A [[debate]] tactic where the opponent is attacked instead of their ideas, frequently used by foolish [[liberals]].
:''False liberal redefinition'' - Accurately pointing out that someone is not qualified or informed enough to give a relevant opinion, sometimes used by [[conservatives]] and objected to by liberals.

:'''[[Affirmative Action]]'''
:Date: 20th century
:''True conservative meaning'' - Reverse [[discrimination]].
:''False liberal redefinition'' - A way of helping minorities.

:'''[[Agnosticism]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - Not being sure whether [[God]] exists, neither believing or disbelieving in Him; not an [[atheism|atheist]]
:''False atheist redefinition'' - A form of atheism

:'''[[Altruism]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - Self sacrifice in the model of [[Jesus]].
:''False liberal redefinition'' - No definition (Liberals frequently argue that altruism doesn't exist.)

:'''[[Amendment]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - An alteration to a [[bill]] or [[constitution]].
:''False liberal redefinition'' - An excuse disguised as a constitutional action to alter a bill so it will authorize the [[government]] to [[Liberals and wasteful spending|wastefully spend more]].

:'''[[American Exceptionalism]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - The belief that the [[United States]] is a [[Christian]] nation, a force for good, and unique in the [[history]] of the world.
:''False liberal redefinition'' - Term to be used when suggesting that the United States causes most of the world's problems.

:'''[[Anarchist]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - Far left extremists who use [[terrorism]] to promote the failed concept of [[communism]].
:''False liberal redefinition'' - Someone who supports the [[free market]].

:'''[[Animal]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - One of the creatures of the land, earth, and sea given to [[man]] to have dominion over.
:''False liberal redefinition'' - Simply a [[science|scientific]] term for one of the kingdoms of life, a definition which does not lift humans above others.

:'''[[Atheism]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - Denial of God's existence, a discredited and failing liberal worldview known to cause mass [[murder]], immorality, [[charity|uncharitableness]], [[obesity]] and other negative consequences.
:''False liberal redefinition'' - Lack of belief of a [[deity]]

:'''[[Autocracy]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - The rule of a single person with unlimited [[power|authority]]. This is the system liberals want.
:''False liberal redefinition'' - [[Dictatorship]] of the [[proletariat]].

:'''[[Axis of Evil]]'''
:''True conservative meaning'' - A group of countries who are sworn enemies of the US: [[North Korea]], [[Iran]], [[Venezuela]], [[Cuba]]
:''False liberal redefinition'' - A term made up by [[George W. Bush]] to get support to go to [[war]].

{{ConservativeDictionary}}

Planned Parenthood

2011-09-26T17:02:13Z

RSnelik: don't need a link to a nonexistent article that probably wouldn't be appropriate for family viewing

[[File:Abortion pro support.jpg|thumb|Supporters and "pro-lifers" controversy.]]
The '''Planned Parenthood Federation of America''' operates clinics which perform [[abortion]]s and provide [[birth control]]<ref>'The controversial topic of "reproductive health services," better known as birth control, was one of many topics debated at the 2002 U.N. General Assembly Special Session for Children.' [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june02/un_children.html (PBS)] </ref> and a limited amount of [[health care]]. Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the United States. <ref>http://www.all.org/stopp/rr0404.htm</ref> It performs nearly 200 times more abortions than referrals for adoption. <ref>http://www.lifenews.com/nat3104.html</ref> It is a [[Eugenics|eugenicist]]-founded organization. It is taxpayer subsidized based upon its tax exempt status and federal funding for birth control.

It promotes [[premarital sex]] to teenagers, suggesting in a publication called ''Making Sense of Abstinence'' that teenagers experiment with foreplay, despite the fact that there is "no research that teenagers who engage in these activities avoid going on to engage in sexual intercourse." [http://thewaronintimacy.com/chapter_2.html]

Despite legally being classified as a non-profit organization, Planned Parenthood reported an average annual "surplus" of over $40 million from the fiscal years ending in 2001 through 2006.<ref>http://www.lifeissues.org/pp/index.html</ref> and had over $1 billion in income in 2006. Planned Parenthood had profits of nearly $115 million and received $336 million dollars from the government in order to carry out its operations, including almost 300,000 abortions that year.<ref>http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/mmalkin/2008/mm_06041.shtml</ref>

The organization boasts that it provides "sexual and reproductive health care", but this is rather transparent code for [[abortion]] and [[contraception]].

Planned Parenthood annually gives awards to those who support their agenda and the top award which they give is called The Margaret Sanger Award. <ref>[http://www.mailman.hs.columbia.edu/news/e-newsletter/AtTheFrontline-vol1no3/ne-AR-Sanger-Award.html]</ref> <ref>[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/ppfa-margaret-sanger-award-winners.htm]</ref> 80% of those who have won this award have been pro-eugenics.

[[Margaret Sanger]] was the founder of Planned Parenthood and was also a proponent of [[eugenics]], believing that blacks were a racially inferior race, along with being a member of both the [[American Eugenics Society]] and the [[English Eugenics Society]]. <ref>[http://www.all.org/abac/contents.txt]</ref> <ref>[http://www.lifeadvocate.org/1_98/feature.htm]</ref> She has been widely praised by many [[liberal]] politicians like [[Hillary Clinton]]. <ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/04/sec_clinton_nonsensically_comp_1.asp Mrs. Clinton Nonsensically Compares Margaret Sanger to Thomas Jefferson]</ref>

[[Alan Guttmacher]], who was a President of Planned Parenthood from 1962 to 1974 and who was also former Vice-President of the American Eugenics Society,<ref>http://catholicwriter.wordpress.com/2007/01/29/what-is-roe-v-wade/</ref><ref>http://www.eugenics-watch.com/</ref>
stated: "We are merely walking down the path that Ms. Sanger has carved out for us." <ref>http://www.nationallifechain.org/PP.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf</ref> Similarly, Faye Wattleton, who was the president of Planned Parenthood until 1992, stated that she was "proud" to be "walking in the footsteps" of Margaret Sanger.<ref>http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf</ref>

==Statements by founder Margaret Sanger==
{{cquote|''We don't want the word out that we want to exterminate the negro population.''}}

{{cquote|'''The campaign for Birth Control ''is not merely of eugenic value'', but is practically identical in ideal with the final aim of Eugenics.''' <ref>October 1921 issue of The Birth Control Review</ref>}}

{{cquote|''The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.'' <ref>http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html</ref>}}

*"the mass of signficant Negroes, particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is [in] that portion of the population least intelligent and fit and least able to rear children properly." - ''Margaret Sanger - The "Negro Project"'' quoting [[W.E.B. DuBois]] with the omission of one word <ref>http://www.jstor.org/view/00147354/di975884/97p14282/1?frame=noframe&userID=80cdbf34@buffalo.edu/01cce4406300501bbf062&dpi=3&config=jstor</ref>

*'''"Before eugenists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed, they must first clear the way for Birth Control. Like the advocates of Birth Control, the eugenists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit. Both are seeking a single end but they lay emphasis upon different methods…"''' <ref>http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hypatia/v022/22.2sanger.html</ref>

*"Organized charity is itself the symptom of a malignant social disease. Those vast complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, ''is breeding and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents.'' My criticism therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success" - Margaret Sanger, ''The Pivot of Civilization'' [NY: Brentano's, 1922], p. 108).<ref>http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/socl/socialconcerns/ThePivotofCivilization/chap6.html</ref>

*'''In Margaret Sanger's book ''The Pivot of Civilization'' she also called for the elimination of "human weeds," for the segregation of "morons, misfits, and maladjusted," and for the sterilization of ''"genetically inferior [black] races."''''' <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/prolife/pp04a.txt</ref>

==Breaking the Law==
Planned Parenthood consistently flaunts the law <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,463404,00.html Planned Parenthood Caught Covering Up Statutory Rape] Fox News, December 08, 2008</ref>

* Aiding child sex-traffickers. <ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=259813</ref>

* Lawsuits alleging they shelter child rapists by not reporting underage rape and abuse. <ref>http://www.childpredators.com/CoverUp.cfm</ref>

* 107 criminal charges, which includes 23 felony charges of late-term abortions and falsifying documents, at the Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid Missouri. <ref>[http://www.womeninfluencingthenation.com/a-new-front-in-the-abortion-wars-by-robert-d.-novak.html A New Front in the Abortion Wars] Women influencing the nation</ref>

* Defrauding the State of [[California]] of $180 million in taxpayer funds. <ref>[http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000006735.cfm Planned Parenthood Accused of Overbilling Government]Citizen Link, March 10, 2008</ref>

* Advises underage teenagers to experiment with pornography and sex without telling parents through their website for teens.

* In February 2010, Planned Parenthood was caught covering up child-sex abuse during an undercover sting for the 10th time.<ref> http://www.freerepublic.com/%5Ehttp://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=125970</ref>

* California and Washington State Planned Parenthood facilities have violated the law by overcharging the government tens of millions of dollars. <ref>[http://www.aclj.org/TrialNotebook/Read.aspx?ID=970 A Big Win Against Planned Parenthood, ACLJ, July 1, 2010]</ref>

== Children Aborted ==
Since 1977, 4.8 million children have died at the hands of Planned Parenthood. <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46449 Planned Parenthood's Annual Report Shows Record Net Assets, Increased Abortions]CNSNews, April 13, 2009</ref>

==Deaths, Lawsuits, Grand Juries==

===Deaths===
[[File:Planned parenthood.jpg|right]]
*Diana Lopez, age 25, was 19 weeks pregnant when she went to a Planned Parenthood for a safe and legal abortion on February 28, 2002. Before the day was over, Diana had bled to death. She left two sons, 4-year-old Frankie and 2-year-old Fabian, motherless. The taxpayers of California paid for the fatal abortion, courtesy of Medi-Cal.<ref>http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl02dlopez.htm</ref>
*Edrica Goode, 21, died Feb. 14, 2007, who died from a botched abortion when a nurse attempted an abortion despite signs indicative of infection.<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56394 Who's to blame when aborting women die?], Jill Stanek, ''WorldNetDaily.com'', June 27, 2007.</ref>

The Blackmun Wall lists all the women who died from legal abortions. <ref>[http://www.lifedynamics.com/Pro-life_Group/Pro-choice_Women/ The Blackmun Wall]</ref>

[[Michelle Malkin]] comments on the deaths of several patients at Planned Parenthood clinics.<ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/21/the-forgotten-victims-of-planned-parenthood/ The forgotten victims of Planned Parenthood]</ref>

===Lawsuits===

==== Phill Kline vs. Planned Parenthood====
"In Kansas, Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline charged Comprehensive Health Of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid Missouri with 107 criminal charges after a District Court judge reviewed the evidence and found probable cause that crimes have been committed." <ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23937 Phill Kline v. Planned Parenthood], Brian Burch, ''[[Human Events]]'', 12/13/2007</ref>
"The Comprehensive Health for Women clinic is being charged with 29 counts of performing illegal late term abortions; 20 counts of unlawful failure to determine the viability of late term abortions; 23 felony counts of making false information and 27 counts for unlawful failure to maintain records." <ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3170 Kansas Planned Parenthood Clinic Charged With 107 Violations Of Law], ''[[Traditional Values Coalition]]'', November 1, 2007</ref> <ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3175 Kansas Planned Parenthood Clinic Charged Over Illegal Late-Term Abortions], Andrea Lafferty, ''[[Traditional Values Coalition]]'', November, 2007</ref>

====Malpractice====
The San Jose Mercury News reports that the mother of a young woman who died at a Riverside, Calif., Planned Parenthood clinic has sued the abortion provider blaming malpractice for her daughter’s toxic shock syndrome death.(requires account registration)<ref>[http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6195970?nclick_check=1]</ref>

===Grand Juries===

====Overland Park, Kansas====
A Grand Jury met on December 10, 2007 to begin an investigation into the practices of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Overland Park, Kansas. <ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3203 Grand Jury Convenes On Kansas Planned Parenthood Clinic], '[[Traditional Values Coalition]]'', December 6, 2007</ref>

== Planned Parenthood and Charges of Targeting Minority Communities ==

According to writer George Grant author of ''Killing Angel'':

"During the 1980s when Planned Parenthood shifted its focus from community-based clinics to school-based clinics, it again targeted inner-city minority neighborhoods...Of the more than 100 school-based clinics that have opened nationwide in the last decade [1980s], none has been at substantially all-white schools....None has been at suburban middle-class schools. All have been at black, minority or ethnic schools.” <ref>http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/special_issues/population/the_negro_project.htm</ref>

Planned Parenthood itself reported that its abortions on minorities in 1991 was 42.7% of its total abortions. <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLIFE/PPRACISM.TXT</ref>. However, during that time period, minorities comprised only 19.7% of the U.S. population.<ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLIFE/PPRACISM.TXT</ref>

According to [[Cybercast News Service]]: "An analysis by the Cybercast News Service compared the location of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics with population data from the U.S. Census in 2000. The results appear to bolster the charge that the organization targets black communities."<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=%5CSpecialReports%5Carchive%5C200502%5CSPE20050207a.html</ref>

{{cquote| One out of every two black children are aborted.}} <ref>[http://www.defundplannedparenthood.org/home.html#jf5361f800 Citizen's Petition] Defund Planned Parenthood</ref>

== Minority Employees Charge Planned Parenthood with Racism ==

Recently, several minority employees of Planned Parenthood have filed multiple complaints of racism against the organization and they stated they were the target of constant slurs in a hostile, anti-male environment controlled by white women.<ref>http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40023</ref> An employee who is charging Planned Parenthood with discrimination said that a complaint was forwarded to Planned Parenthood human resources department and nothing was ever done about it and later he was put on probation and subsequently fired. <ref>http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40023</ref> Attorney Richard D. Ackerman, the lead attorney for two claimants, stated "This is a really sad state of affairs. It is unfortunate to find out that [Planned Parenthood, Los Angelos] PPLA, as a self-proclaimed promoter of 'tolerance and diversity,' is engaging in what appears to be the most primitive form of hate against its own employees." <ref>http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/aug/04081909.html</ref>

== Planned Parenthood's Teen Website Gets It Barred from California High School ==
A California father looked at Planned Parenthood's teen website and found it disgusting and vile. <ref>http://www.all.org/stopp/st020627.htm</ref>
The father shared what he learned about the site to the school board and they were so shocked they cancelled Planned Parenthood's appearance at the school which is in Coronado, California. <ref>http://www.all.org/stopp/st020627.htm</ref> The teen website also promotes [[Pornography|porn]] to teens. <ref> The Planned Parenthood teen Web site that says it was created "to provide medically accurate sexual health information for teens on the Internet," is advising teens that viewing pornography is a normal and "safer" way of enjoying sex. </ref>

== Planned Parenthood and Requests to Issue a Formal Apology ==
Planned Parenthood has been asked to issue a formal apology for what they did under Margaret Sanger's leadership and stop giving awards in Margaret Sanger's name but Planned Parenthood refuses to do so. <ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/Culture/Archive/200205/CUL20020506a.html</ref>

== Planned Parenthood and Charges It Still Carries Out Racist and Eugenic Policies ==
A critic of Planned Parenthood wrote:

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
'''"In the latter half of the 1960s, Planned Parenthood and similar groups spent'''
'''millions of dollars promoting the idea that the U.S. was in the midst of a'''
'''dangerous population explosion. The idea was so absurd it could be disproved'''
'''in five minutes at any public library. Caught up in the hysteria, however,'''
'''the nation's news media never questioned why groups were warning of a'''
'''"population bomb" in the midst of plummeting birth rates.'''
</blockquote>

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
Among friends, Planned Parenthood officials described the real situation. On
August 11, 1965, Dr. Robert Nelson, Medical Director of Planned Parenthood of
metropolitan Washington, spoke at the Senate "Baby Boom" hearings. He noted
that in Washington, DC, "the less well-off economic section birth rate is
29/1000 and going up; the rate of the economically more secure group is
16/1000 and going down."<ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLIFE/PPHISTRY.TXT</ref>
</blockquote>

Some critics of Planned Parenthood charge that it has a history of racist and eugenic policies and still carries out those policies advocated by its Founder.<ref>http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/special_issues/population/the_negro_project.htm</ref><ref>http://www.leaderu.com/humanities/casey/ch3.html</ref>

== Taxpayer Money ==

See [http://www.conservapedia.com/Taxpayer-funded_abortion Taxpayer-funded abortion] 
Planned Parenthood has received over $3.9 billion dollars of taxpayer money since 1987. Over $1 billion dollars worth of federal grants (taxpayer dollars) in the years 2002- 2008 is unaccounted for. <ref>[http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=172573 Missing: $1.3 billion in taxpayers' money, WND.com, July 3, 2010]</ref> In April 2011, Indiana house and senate members voted for a bill stripping Planned Parenthood of its federal funding. Governor Mitch Daniels signed the bill in May, stating that he opposes any tax dollars going to agencies that perform abortions. The federal government is challenging the law.

==Planned Parenthood's missing millions==
According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), audits show the organization spent just $657.1 million between 2002 and 2008 from federal government grants and programs, but the abortion behemoth's own annual reports show that it took in $2.3 billion from government grants and programs during the same time period.<ref>Washington Times, "Planned Parenthood's missing millions", June 18, 2010</ref>

==See also==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Planned Parenthood|Articles about '''Planned Parenthood''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Margaret Sanger]]

==External links==
*[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ Planned Parenthood Federation of America]
*[http://www.all.org/stopp/plan.htm American Life League presents STOPP International]
*[http://www.ldi.org/ LifeDynamics.com]
*[http://www.newsbusters.org/node/11573 LA Times Writer Eludes Truth On Planned Parenthood Founder]
*[http://www.defundplannedparenthood.org Defund Planned Parenthood petition]
*[http://www.maafa21.com Racist founding of Planned Parenthood]
*[http://www.childpredators.com/ Planned Parenthood Exposed- Conceals Child Rape]
*[http://www.klannedparenthood.com/History_of_Abortion_Statistics/ Klan Parenthood]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Abortion]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category:Lunatics]]
[[Category:Racist Organizations]]

Sam Harris

2011-09-24T23:32:02Z

RSnelik: clarification

[[File:Sam Harris 01.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|[[Sam Harris]]
 
 
(photo obtained from [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sam_Harris_01.jpg Wikimedia commons], see [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sam_Harris_01.jpg license agreement]) ]]
'''Sam Harris''' is an [[American]] [[author]] and [[atheist]]. [[Sam Harris]] is one of the founders of the [[New Atheism]] movement. Dr. Harris received a Ph.D. in [[neuroscience]] from University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and is also a graduate in philosophy from [[Stanford University]]. He wrote two controversial, but New York Times best seller books, ''The End of Faith'' and ''Letter to a Christian Nation''. He has written essays such as "Science must destroy religion"<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/science-must-destroy-reli_b_13153.html Huffington Post article]</ref>.

== Harris claims atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ==

see also: [[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]] and [[Views on Atheists]]

Dr. Sam Harris is a founder of the [[New Atheism]] movement. He is quite aware of the stigma surrounding atheism and has even advocated that atheists no longer call themselves atheists.<ref>http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist</ref> In fact, Dr. Harris has said concerning the label of atheist, "It's right next to child molester as a designation."<ref>http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist</ref>

== Gender and racial demographics of Sam Harris' audience ==

''See also:'' [[Western atheism and race]]

According to the web traffic tracking company Quantcast, white males appear to be the group of individuals who are most receptive to [[Richard Dawkins]]' and atheist Sam Harris' message.<ref>http://www.quantcast.com/richarddawkins.net#demographics</ref><ref>http://www.quantcast.com/samharris.org</ref> Survey data and website tracking data of prominent [[atheism|atheists]]' websites indicate that in the [[Western World]], [[Atheism appears to be significantly less appealing to women|atheism appears to be significantly less appealing to women]].<ref>http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.livescience.com/culture/090227-religion-men-women.html</ref><ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_appears_to_be_significantly_less_appealing_to_women</ref> These findings suggest that [[New Atheism]] movement is significant more appealing to white males.

== See also ==

*[[Essay: Where was Sam Harris when the New Atheists needed him?| Where was Sam Harris when the New Atheists needed him?]] - [[satire]]
*[[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

==External Links==
*[http://www.tektonics.org/gk/harrisletter.html Letter to a Maladjusted Misotheist]
*[http://www.truefreethinker.com/sam-harris Sam Harrris] by [[True Free Thinker]]

[[Category:Atheists|Harris, Sam]]
[[Category: New Atheism]]

Worst Liberal Books

2011-09-24T23:28:18Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Essay: Worst Liberal Books

#REDIRECT [[Essay: Worst Liberal Books]]

Speed of light

2011-09-24T21:59:23Z

RSnelik: This is the United States

The '''speed of light''' in a vacuum (postulated to be constant for all inertial observers by the [[Special Theory of Relativity]]) is approximately 186,282.3 miles per second. As the speed of light is now used to define the [[SI]] meter, this is now the meter's value ''by definition''.

In physics, it is often represented in equations by the letter '''c,''' as in
:λ = c / f
([[wavelength]] of an electromagnetic wave in vacuum = the speed of light divided by the wave's frequency).

The speed of light is about one foot per nanosecond. The late computer pioneer Admiral Grace Hopper was fond of keeping foot-long lengths of wire in her purse; she used them as props for her talks, referring to them as "nanoseconds," and using them to explain how the speed of light set limitations on [[computing]] systems: no signal could possibly propagate in any wire faster than the speed of light.<ref>Chiarella, Donald Joseph Gray (2002), ''Life in God's Management Corps,'' [http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0595256430&id=VhM9jDwbywUC&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&ots=ZXHirs9jQI&dq=grace+hopper+nanosecond&ie=ISO-8859-1&sig=XmbYtV2laxCMIKMLzR1eXHP1Eok p. 14]</ref>

The speed of light is slower in any medium which is not a vacuum, and varies from medium to medium. This variation gives rise to (as a result of [[quantum mechanics]], particularly the concept of a path of least action) the phenomenon of [[refraction]]. When a charged particle exceeds the speed of light in the medium in which it is travelling, it emits [[Cherenkov Radiation]].

Since the speed of light in a vacuum is observed to be constant, it can be used to define distances as well. The distance that light travels in one year is known as a [[light-year]], which is about 6 million million (6x1012) miles.

The speed of light raises questions regarding the age of the universe, which are usually summed up under the term "[[starlight problem]]".

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[category: astronomy]]
[[category: physics]]

Pandora

2011-09-24T21:54:11Z

RSnelik:

In [[Greek]] mythology, '''Pandora''' was a woman entrusted by the gods with a box, and told never to open it. However, due to what the story calls feminine curiosity, she did open the box, and resultantly let loose from it all the misfortunes that befall men (such as [[greed]] and [[death]]). Pandora closed the box, trapping the sprite of hope inside, but when it begged to be released, she opened the box again, allowing hope to enter the world. <ref>[http://www.pantheon.org/areas/folklore/folktales/articles/pandora.html Encyclopedia Mythica: Pandora's Box]</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[category:Greek Mythology]]

Question evolution

2011-09-24T21:50:39Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Question evolution! campaign

#REDIRECT [[Question evolution! campaign]]

Rebecca Watson

2011-09-24T21:36:26Z

RSnelik: grammar

[[File:Rebecca-watson.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[Atheism|Atheist]] Rebecca Watson
 
 
(photo obtained from [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rebecca_watson_geek.jpg Wikimedia commons], see: [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en license agreement])]]
'''Rebecca Watson''' (born October 18, 1980) is an atheist blogger and podcast host. Watson has written about widespread [[misogny]] within the atheist community and she has received threats of rape.<ref>[http://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ The Privilege Delusion by Rebecca Watson - Skepchick]</ref> Prior to the [[Elevatorgate]] scandal, which is a scandal involving atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] insensitive comments made to Watson, ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men (see also: [[Atheism and women]]).<ref>http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/08/socially-autistic-atheist.html</ref>

Rebecca Watson and Sid Rodrigues were married, however, on April 8, 2011, she announced that she and Rodrigues were separated and seeking a divorce.<ref>http://skepchick.org/2011/04/a-note-about-my-personal-life/</ref>

== Elevatorgate scandal ==

[[Elevatorgate]] is a term commonly used to describe a scandal involving [[Richard Dawkins]]' inappropriate comments made to fellow atheist Rebecca Watson. In 2011, Richard Dawkins was widely criticized within the atheist community and in various press outlets for his insensitive comments made to atheist Rebecca Watson about an incident which occurred in an elevator.<ref>
*[http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/08/atheist_flirting Richard Dawkins: Skeptic of women? - Salon, July 8, 2011]
*[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]
*[http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists Richard Dawkins Torn Limb From Limb—By Atheists - Gawker]
*[http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-15/atheist-sexism-women/50416454/1 Atheists address sexism issues - USA Today]</ref>

=== Rebecca Watson and Elevatorgate ===
[[Image:2402173645 c8e6168fe7.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|[[Richard Dawkins]]
 
 
(photo by Shane Pope, Title: Richard Dawkins, obtained from [http://flickr.com/photos/shanepope/2402173645/ Flickr, see license agreement)] ]]
As a result of Elevatorgate, atheist Rebecca Watson wrote concerning Richard Dawkins:
{{cquote|This person who I always admired for his intelligence and compassion does not care about my experience as an atheist woman and therefore will no longer be rewarded with my money, my praise, or my attention. I will no longer recommend his books to others, buy them as presents, or buy them for my own library. I will not attend his lectures or recommend that others do the same. There are so many great scientists and thinkers out there that I don't think my reading list will suffer."<ref>[http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/07/richard-dawkins-draws-feminist-wrath-over-sexual-harassment-comments/39637/ Richard Dawkins Gets into a Comments War with Feminists by Caitlin Dickson - The Atlantic Wire, Jul 06, 2011]</ref>}}

=== Allegation that Rebecca Watson was behaving hypocritically ===

Amanda Read wrote in the ''[[Washington Times]]'' that she believed Watson was behaving hypocritically and declared:
{{cquote|The point is that because the issue is sexism in the atheist movement, perceptions of sexism are not based on absolute principle, but on relative emotion.

Watson speaks out against the sexual objectification of women, but she apparently sees nothing wrong with the pinup calendars that she and her female atheist friends publish. [[PZ Myers|Myers]] defended her views on his blog, but only last year he linked to an interesting interview with Nina Hartley, a feminist atheist who sees nothing wrong with women performing as sex workers.

You see, sexism and the exploitation of women are not immoral to godless women as long as such things are on their terms.<ref>[http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/not-your-average-read/2011/jul/16/sexism-atheism-Dawkins-Watson-feminists-Skepchick/ Of sexism and atheism: Richard Dawkins gets in trouble with feminists, Washington Times, July 16, 2011]</ref>}}

== See also ==

*[[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Atheism and women]]
*[[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]]

== External links ==

*[http://skepchick.org/author/rebecca/ Rebecca Watson - Skepchick] - Rebecca Watson founded the blog Skepchick
*[http://skepchick.org/2011/04/a-note-about-my-personal-life/ Rebecca Watson - a note about my personal life]

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category: Atheism]]
[[Category: Atheists]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-24T20:40:45Z

RSnelik: book descriptions

Despite many of today's non-fiction[[book| books]] being overrun by [[liberal bias]], [[liberal deceit|deceit]], and [[liberal values|distortion]], there are still some great conservative non-fiction books that promote true [[conservative values]].

#The [[The Bible|''Bible'']] - the infallible Word of [[God]] contains innumerable conservative values including [[Christian values]]
#''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' by [[Adam Smith]] - The classic guide to [[capitalism]] and an explanation of the necessity of [[free trade]]
#''The Conscience of a Conservative'' by [[Barry Goldwater]] - describes the selfless values of [[conservatism]]
#''Feminist Fantasies'' by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] -
#''A Choice Not An Echo'' by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] -
#''The Burden of Bad Ideas'' by [[Heather MacDonald]] -
#''McCarthy and His Enemies'' by [[William F. Buckley, Jr.]] and [[L. Brent Bozell Jr.]] - defends [[America|American]] [[patriot]] [[Joe McCarthy]] in his fight against [[communism|communist]] infiltration of this great country
#''Eat the Rich'' by PJ O'Rourke - An examination of the relative merits of capitalism and socialism through four case studies: Good Capitalism (USA), "Bad Capitalism" (Albania), "Good socialism" (Sweden) and Bad socialism(Cuba)
#''The New Answers Book'' by [[Ken Ham]] - gives comprehensive, biblical creationist answers to twenty-five important questions concerning the Bible and [[creation]]/[[evolution]]

[[Category: Essays about Conservatism]]

David Allen Green

2011-09-24T20:31:51Z

RSnelik: smoother sentence

'''David Allen Green''' is a British lawyer and writer as well as a legal correspondent for the ''New Statesman'' and the blog as "Jack of Kent". Green is a [[Philosophical skepticism|skeptic]] who helps run Westminster Skeptics.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Statesman - 06 July 2011]</ref>

== Commentary on Richard Dawkins ==

Commenting on [[Elevatorgate]] a scandal involving Richard Dawkins, Green said he believed Dawkins was a sexist.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]</ref> In addition, Green wrote: "Can Richard Dawkins still credibly pose as a champion of rational thinking and an evidence-based approach? In my opinion, he certainly cannot, at least not in the way he did before."<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Statesman - 06 July 2011]</ref>

See also:

*[[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Atheism and women]]
*[[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]]

==References==
{{reflist|3}}
[[Category: Lawyers]]
[[Category: British Lawyers]]
[[Category: British Writers]]

Elevatorgate

2011-09-24T20:29:09Z

RSnelik: smoother sentence

[[File:Richard Dawkins pic.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|260px|right|[[Richard Dawkins]] ]]
'''Elevatorgate''' is a term commonly used to describe a scandal involving [[Richard Dawkins]]' inappropriate comments made to fellow atheist Rebecca Waston. In 2011, Richard Dawkins was widely criticized within the atheist community and in various press outlets for his insensitive comments made to atheist Rebecca Watson about an incident which occurred in an elevator.<ref>
*[http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/08/atheist_flirting Richard Dawkins: Skeptic of women? - Salon, July 8, 2011]
*[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]
*[http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists Richard Dawkins Torn Limb From Limb—By Atheists - Gawker]
*[http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-15/atheist-sexism-women/50416454/1 Atheists address sexism issues - USA Today]</ref> Specifically, Watson was propositioned after an atheist event in an elevator by a man who apparently was a fellow atheist during the early hours of the morning and she was upset about the incident. Watson has written about widespread [[misogny]] within the atheist community and she has received threats of rape.<ref>[http://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ The Privilege Delusion by Rebecca Watson - Skepchick]</ref> Prior to the Elevatorgate incident, ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men.<ref>http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/08/socially-autistic-atheist.html</ref>

The ''New Statesman'' reporter and fellow [[Philosophical skepticism|skeptic]] [[David Allen Green]] said he believed Dawkins was a sexist.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]</ref> In addition, Green wrote: "Can Richard Dawkins still credibly pose as a champion of rational thinking and an evidence-based approach? In my opinion, he certainly cannot, at least not in the way he did before."<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]</ref>

=== Rebecca Watson and Elevatorgate ===
[[Image:2402173645 c8e6168fe7.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|[[Richard Dawkins]]
 
 
(photo by Shane Pope, Title: Richard Dawkins, obtained from [http://flickr.com/photos/shanepope/2402173645/ Flickr, see license agreement)] ]]
As a result of Elevatorgate, atheist Rebecca Watson wrote concerning Richard Dawkins:
{{cquote|This person who I always admired for his intelligence and compassion does not care about my experience as an atheist woman and therefore will no longer be rewarded with my money, my praise, or my attention. I will no longer recommend his books to others, buy them as presents, or buy them for my own library. I will not attend his lectures or recommend that others do the same. There are so many great scientists and thinkers out there that I don't think my reading list will suffer."<ref>[http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/07/richard-dawkins-draws-feminist-wrath-over-sexual-harassment-comments/39637/ Richard Dawkins Gets into a Comments War with Feminists by Caitlin Dickson - The Atlantic Wire, Jul 06, 2011]</ref>}}

=== Allegation that Rebecca Watson was behaving hypocritically ===

Amanda Read wrote in the ''[[Washington Times]]'' that she believed Watson was behaving hypocritically and declared:
{{cquote|The point is that because the issue is sexism in the atheist movement, perceptions of sexism are not based on absolute principle, but on relative emotion.

Watson speaks out against the sexual objectification of women, but she apparently sees nothing wrong with the pinup calendars that she and her female atheist friends publish. [[PZ Myers|Myers]] defended her views on his blog, but only last year he linked to an interesting interview with Nina Hartley, a feminist atheist who sees nothing wrong with women performing as sex workers.

You see, sexism and the exploitation of women are not immoral to godless women as long as such things are on their terms.<ref>[http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/not-your-average-read/2011/jul/16/sexism-atheism-Dawkins-Watson-feminists-Skepchick/ Of sexism and atheism: Richard Dawkins gets in trouble with feminists, Washington Times, July 16, 2011]</ref>}}

== Previous incident of Richard Dawkins being unkind to a woman ==

In September of 2010, Richard Dawkins became nasty towards a woman in an audience he spoke before.<ref>http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/richard-dawkins-i-never-meet-people-who-disagree-with-me-2080451.html</ref>

For more information please see: [[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]

== Uphill battle of Rebecca Watkins and female atheists combatting atheist misogny ==

Although major press outlets have covered Elevatorgate<ref>
*[http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/08/atheist_flirting Richard Dawkins: Skeptic of women? - Salon, July 8, 2011]
*[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011]
*[http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists Richard Dawkins Torn Limb From Limb—By Atheists - Gawker]
*[http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-15/atheist-sexism-women/50416454/1 Atheists address sexism issues - USA Today]</ref>, most of the commentary surrounding the events of Elevatorgate has been in the atheist blogosphere.

Concerning post Elevatorgate activities of Rebecca Watson, one atheist blogger wrote about Rebecca and her fellow female bloggers at the website Skepchick:
{{cquote|The fatal decision was to extend the fight to tackle the greatest problem remaining in modern skepticism – socially awkward male nerds.

“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak - [[Sun Tzu]] “

The skepchick army, marshalling their forces, decided to attack the nerds their presumed weakest point – on the internet.

Unfortunately, and apparently a surprise for some, the internet is the perfect natural environment of the socially awkward nerd.<ref>[http://sneerreview.blogspot.com/2011/07/elevatorgate-dawkins-strikes-back.html Elevatorgate: Dawkins strikes back]</ref>}}

As noted earlier, prior to the Elevatorgate incident, ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men.<ref>http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/08/socially-autistic-atheist.html</ref>

=== Recent studies concerning atheism and women ===

See also: [[Atheism and women]]

A 2008 study by Trinity College found that women are significantly more religious than men in America.<ref>http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf</ref> In 2007, the Pew Research Center found that American women were more religious than American men.<ref>http://www.livescience.com/culture/090227-religion-men-women.html</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Atheism and women]]
*[[Richard Dawkins, atheist atrocities, and historical revisionism]]
*[[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]]
*[[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]]

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category: Richard Dawkins]]
[[Category: New Atheism]]

Christopher Dodd

2011-09-24T20:27:23Z

RSnelik: name

{{Officeholder
|name=Christopher Dodd
|image=ChrisDodd.jpg
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=Jackie Marie Clegg
|religion=Roman Catholic
|offices=
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Connecticut
|terms=January 5, 1981 - January 5, 2011
|preceded=Abraham A. Ribicoff
|former=n
|succeeded=[[Richard Blumenthal]]
}}
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=Connecticut
|district=2nd
|terms=January 3, 1975 – January 3, 1981
|preceded=Robert H. Steele
|former=n
|succeeded=Sam Gejdenson
}}
}}

'''Christopher "Chris" Dodd''' is a [[liberal]] former United States Senator from [[Connecticut]], and 2008 Democratic presidential primary contender. Dodd served as the powerful chair of the Senate Banking Committee; he announced he would not seek a sixth term in 2010. Dodd faced a difficult reelection because of charges of corruption and his failure to head off or solve the nation's banking crisis. The December 2009 Rasmussen Reports poll found that Republican challenger [[Rob Simmons]], a moderate former Congressman, had a wide lead 48% to 35%. <ref>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/connecticut/election_2010_connecticut_senate_race</ref>
== Political Career ==

Chris Dodd was born on May 27, 1944, in Willimantic, [[Connecticut]]. He was the fifth child of Senator Thomas J. Dodd. After Dodd graduated from Providence College, a Catholic school, with a B.A. in English Literature , he served in the [[United States Peace Corps]] in 1966-68. He served in the [[Dominican Republic]] were he worked carrying out humanitarian efforts for the rural community; he became fluent in Spanish. Dodd later served in the Army National Guard. Dodd earned a law degree from the University of Louisville in 1972. He was first elected to the [[United States Congress]] in 1974. He served three terms as congressmen, and in 1980, was elected to the United States Senate. In 1995, Dodd served as General Chairman of the [[Democrat National Committee]], a position he held in till 1997.

In the 1980s Senator Dodd took the lead in the liberal opposition to President [[Ronald Reagan]]'s anti-Communist policy in Central America. He has long opposed the nation's embargo on the Communist [[Cuba]] of [[Fidel Castro]].

== Ethics Issues ==

In 2008, allegations appeared that Dodd cut special discounts deals on his home mortgage from Countrywide subprime mortgage company. Dodd was cleared in 2009; he did not get a lower rate.<ref>http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/07/08/ap5190637.html , AP Dodd's popularity slips in Connecticut
, July 8, 2008</ref>

Dodd legally received over $14,700 from lobbyist [[Jack Abramoff]], who in now in prison for his bribery.

In 2009, Judicial Watch ranked Christopher Dodd the most corrupt politician in Washington. <ref>http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/dec/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2009</ref>

==Senate Banking Committee==
Dodd has been in charge of financial-services rules for the $787 billion stimulus bill and TARP that bails-out the financial sector. On March 16, Mr. Dodd criticized bonuses given to executives of [[AIG]], the insurance giant, saying, "This is another outrageous example of executives -- including those whose decisions were responsible for the problems that caused AIG's collapse -- enriching themselves at the expense of taxpayers." One rule he included was an exemption for contractual obligations prior to Feb 11, 2009, which allowed for AIG bonuses. The exact rule below;
{{cquote| Crack down on bonuses, retention awards and incentive compensation: Bonuses can only be paid in the form of long-term restricted stock, equal to no greater than 1/3 of total annual compensation, and will vest only when taxpayer funds are repaid. There is an exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009. }} Dodd will not take responsibility for the confusion saying his original amendment did not include that exemption.[http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/finance/dodd-cracks-aig---time/ Amid AIG Furor, Dodd Tries to Undo Bonus Protections] Fox News, March 17, 2009</ref>

Dodd was AIG’s largest single recipient of campaign donations during the 2008 election cycle with $103,100.

==Political Positions==

===Abortion===
Throughout Dodd’s career in the senate he has constantly voted against pro-life legislation, while supporting easier restrictions on abortion. In 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2003, Dodd voted against bills which would reduce partial-birth abortion<ref>http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=S0131103</ref>.

===Iraq===
In 2002, Dodd voted to use force against Iraq. Dodd support the Feingold-Reid proposal- which sets a time table for ending the war in [[Iraq]] by March 2008. He does not support sending more troops to Iraq but does support more troops for the war in Afghanistan.

===Education===
Dodd supported President Bush’s, [[No Child Left Behind Act]] in 2001, and now supports its expansion <ref>http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53277&type=category&category=27&go.x=11&go.y=17</ref>. Dodd’s plan for education system is to increase salaries for teachers to create more incentives. He also is calling for increase [[federal funding]] for creating lower interest rates for student loans<ref>http://www.chrisdodd.com/issues/education</ref>.

===Unions===
Dodd advocates the pro-union [[Employee Free Choice Act]].

==Presidential contender==
Going into the race for the 2008 Democratic nomination for president, Dodd was an unknown senator. Only 22% of likely Democratic primary voters had a favorable opinion of Dodd, 20% were unfavorable. Dodd trailed third to last in the polls, with a mere 1% of Democrats for whom he was the first choice He had $7.5 million but withdrew from the race because of his poor finish in the [[Iowa Caucus]]. Though Dodd did not officially endorse any candidate.

==External Links==
*[http://www.chrisdodd.com/ Chris Dodd Official Website]
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/author/chris-dodd/ What Liberals Say - Chris Dodd], [[Accuracy In Media]]

==References==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Dodd, Christopher}}
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Irish-Americans]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Corruption]]
[[Category:Connecticut]]
[[Category:111th United States Congress]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-23T21:40:12Z

RSnelik: The New Answers Book

Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Conservative Personalities

2011-09-23T21:14:12Z

RSnelik: Wikipedia no longer has a photo of Sally Kern in her article

This article lists examples of [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|Bias in Wikipedia]], as it relates to Conservative Politicians and Personalities:
# Wikipedia has thousands of obscure pages for individuals that the public never heard of or recognize. Conservative undercover journalist [[Hannah Giles]] is not given her own page mostly likely due to the fact she has taken on the liberal establishment and won. A search of Hannah Giles gives her an obscure paragraph in what Wikipedia titles the ''ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Giles#Hannah_Giles_and_James_O.27Keefe]
# For [[liberal]] politicians, Wikipedia uses flattering photos. But for [[conservative]] politician [[Sally Kern]], about whom [[homosexual]] activists have had a sissy fit, Wikipedia used an absurd, uncharacteristic photo.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Kern</ref>
# The most popular talk radio hosts in America are all conservative. Siding with liberalism and hiding from conservative dominance, Wikipedia chose not to categorize conservative radio hosts. However, they did categorize Progressive talk show hosts even though they lack talent or an audience. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_talk_radio_hosts]
#Amid the [[libel]] controversy against [[Rush Limbaugh]] during his bid to purchase an NFL team, the [[St. Louis Rams]], Newsbusters revealed the false quote's Web source appeared to be from [[Wikipedia]].<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=112839 Limbaugh: Media 'scum' lying about fake racist quotes], WND, October 13, 2009.</ref> The quote has been removed and replaced several times since 2005. And the Wikipedia entry did not provide a transcript link to Limbaugh's show with the citation, because the quote did not exist but was part of a bias strategy by Wikipedia to label Limbaugh a racist. While the talk host criticized the website that bills itself as an "online encyclopedia," Wikipedia editors were busy discussing their strategy for handling the controversy.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rush_Limbaugh#Legal_threat</ref> It was later revealed that the quotes were added by a highly controversial, bias user with the IP address of 69.64.213.146.<ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/the_search_for_the_wikipedia_l.html The Search for the Wikipedia Libelist (important update)], American Thinker, October 21, 2009.</ref>
#''Alma mater'' normally refers to a college that a person actually graduated from. <ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/alma%20mater</ref> However, at [[Wikipedia]], the biography for co-founder Jimmy Wales prominently lists two colleges he didn't graduate from as alma maters. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Wales&oldid=272581018</ref> [[Sean Hannity]] attended but did not graduate from NYU. Wikipedia does not list NYU as Sean Hannity's alma mater because he is a conservative. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sean_Hannity&oldid=272201242</ref>
# Wikipedia tries to smear [[conservatives]] as "conspiracy theorists," even when they are not, and yet omits that epithet for [[liberals]] who insist there are vast conspiracies, such as [[Hillary Clinton]]'s claim of a "vast right-wing conspiracy." Compare Wikipedia's entry on [[Phyllis Schlafly]], which repeats a false assertion that she "veers off into conspiracy theories,"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Schlafly</ref> with Wikipedia's entry on Hillary Clinton, which provides her quote of a "vast" conspiracy yet refuses to describe her as a conspiracy theorist.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton</ref> Wikipedia's entry on [[liberal]] [[Michael Moore]], the biggest conspiracy theorist of all, does not even include any reference to the word "conspiracy"!<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moore</ref>
# The Wikipedia page on [[Phyllis Schlafly]] implies that she took a stance in favor of segregation in 1960, and that she used Jewish code words. The source is a NY Times book review of a book about her, but the review does not say those things. The book review criticizes the book author instead. The Wikipedia article does not identify the book reviewer as Jewish, even though she is a Jew raising a Jewish issue. A user who tried to correct these errors was blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia, and a comment was even removed from the Talk page.
# The Wikipedia page on [[John Lott]], a respected conservative commentator and academic, cites supposed errors in Lott's characterization of [[liberal bias]] against gun owners in his book ''More Guns, Less Crime''. In fact, Lott's figures are accurate, and Wikipedia's sanctimonious claim of "bias" for his exposure of liberal media bias smacks of [[liberal hypocrisy]]. The rest of the entry is also filled with other unfounded smears and accusations attempting to silence his factual conservatism, characteristic of Wikipedia's [[liberal censorship]]. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott#Media_bias_and_defensive_gun_use</ref>
# Despite Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neo#Neologisms policy on not including "neologisms"], the disgusting and hateful term [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_(neologism) Santorum] is listed on Wikipedia and ranks #2 in Google. This was a smear term specifically invented by gay rights activist [[Dan Savage]] to be derogatory of Republican [[Presidential_Election_2012|Presidential candidate]] [[Rick Santorum]]. Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons also is said to restrict material that may cause "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Santorum harm to the subject]." The page has existed for five years, was nominated for deletion, but all the liberal editors of Wikipedia had their say, and the article has been kept.
# Wikipedia uses trivia to push its [[liberal]] icons on readers. In its first 200 words about [[conservative]] Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Wikipedia used to include the meaningless trivia that he was born on the same day as (liberal) [[Jimmy Carter]].<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Rehnquist</ref> Yet nowhere in Carter's entry does it say he was born on the same day as Rehnquist.
# [[Wikipedia]] biographies for conservatives such as [[Rush Limbaugh]] and [[Michelle Malkin]] are usually saddled with large sections titled “controversies”. These “controversies” are often nothing but quotes or complaints by fringe [[liberal]] elements, and Wikipedia advises against such sections, but its liberal editors ensure the biased use of such sections.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Criticism&oldid=225325117</reF> However, the Wikipedia page for “Hanoi” Jane Fonda describes her obviously controversial propagandizing for the North Vietnamese government during the Vietnam War as “political activism” rather than “controversy”. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Fonda</ref>
# [[Wikipedia]] allows countless entries flattering obscure [[liberals]], but lacks many entries about leading [[conservatives]]. For example, the [[Wikipedia]] entry on pro-life leader [[Judie Brown]] was previously nothing but a redirect<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Judie_Brown&redirect=no</ref> to an entry about an organization which barely mentions her.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Life_League</ref> A proper page for her has since been added<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judie_Brown</ref>.
#The Wikipedia page for Republican Mark Kirk<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&oldid=263357766</ref> made no mention of the widely-reported and significant fact that, as a Navy reservist, he is the first U.S. Representative since WWII to make an overseas deployment to an imminent danger area (Afghanistan).<ref>http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/il10_kirk/Kirk_Completes_Reserve_Tour.html</ref> Instead, the Wikipedia page devotes an entire section titled "contributors" that attempts to smear Kirk with tenuous associations to controversial figures because of relatively small campaign donations. A grammatically-incorrect acknowledgment of Kirk's deployment eventually appeared.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&oldid=263472629</ref> Kirk's wikipedia page mentioned a $1,000 donation from Tony Rezko <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&oldid=268845790</ref>, but Obama's page does not mention the $54,416 <ref>http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353782,CST-NWS-rezpols23.article</ref> Rezko donation. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barack_Obama&oldid=272320979</ref> Only after this issue was brought up were issues corrected.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Kirk&oldid=274813568</ref>
#[[Wikipedia]] bias against [[movement conservative]]s is intense. [[Michele Bachmann]] won reelection in 2008 by 3% in a state that went heavily [[Democratic]], but instead of crediting her [[conservative]] positions the biased Wikipedia entry states, "Despite fallout from controversial statements that she had made, Bachmann defeated her Democratic opponent Elwyn Tinklenberg in the 2008 election."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Bachmann#cite_ref-33</ref>
# [[Wikipedia]]'s entry on [[conservative]] [[Ron Paul]] smears him with unsubstantiated statements (newsletter "issues gave tactical advice to right-wing militia groups and advanced various conspiracy theories"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ron_Paul&oldid=183792833</ref>), misleading attributions of statements (Paul renounced the statements in 2001), and an overall political hatchet job ... and then locks the page to prevent correction!<ref>The page was locked from January 8 to August 6, 2008. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=protect&user=&page=Ron+Paul&year=&month=-1]</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{bias in wikipedia}}
[[Category:Conservatism]]
[[Category:Media]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-23T17:48:44Z

RSnelik: standardizing format

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T05:12:49Z

RSnelik: there we go

The Wealth of Nations

2011-09-22T05:12:03Z

RSnelik:

'''''The Wealth of Nations''''' is a classic [[book]] written by [[Adam Smith]] about [[capitalism]]. Although it was first published in 1776, it is still very relevant today as it discusses the many advantages of the world's best [[economics|economic system]].

==See also==
*[[Capitalism]]
*[[Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books|Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books]]

The Wealth of Nations

2011-09-22T05:11:16Z

RSnelik: surprised there's not already an article on this

'''The Wealth of Nations''' is a classic [[book]] written by [[Adam Smith]] about [[capitalism]]. Although it was first published in 1776, it is still very relevant today as it discusses the many advantages of the world's best [[economics|economic system]].

==See also==
*[[Capitalism]]
*[[Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books|Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books]]

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:56:10Z

RSnelik: I see. Thanks for clarifying

I was thrown off by the fact that someone created the article under my feet. I was further thrown off by the fact that the first two books on the list were the first two books on my version of the list, though I simply listed the bible and gave the full title of the wealth of nations. --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 00:37, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:That's OK; I was just having a dig at you for adding two books by Phyllis Schlafly. I bet you always brought your teacher an apple :-D --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 00:38, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::One of the staffers at the Eagle forum pointed me here, so me being here is me sucking up to Mrs. Schlafly if anything. :D --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 00:41, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Ha ha, you're getting two for the price of one then :-) --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 00:42, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::If it's not complementary about Sweden's system, why did you write their system as "good socialism"? No matter what country's using it, socialism is not a good thing. [[User:RSnelik|RSnelik]] 00:45, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Not knowing how the book reads, I figured it meant "Oppressive dictatorship socialism" and not "oppressive dictatorship socialism".--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 00:47, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::I'm not sure I follow you. [[User:RSnelik|RSnelik]] 00:49, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Read the book, I have every confidence in PJ to accurately represent the situations.--[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 00:51, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::The "Good socialism" etc designations are section titles in the book. O'Rourke visited and examined four countries - two capitalist, two socialist. He basically ranked them as: USA, Sweden, Cuba, Albania and came to the conclusion that capitalism is the superior system. He was HL Mencken Research Fellow at the Cato Institute, he's a registered Republican and NRA member and he's definitely conservative. Please let's not start judging books we haven't read, eh? --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 00:51, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Thanks DrDean. I'd get quite annoyed if anyone started calling PJ a liberal (although in Europe that's exactly what he'd be, ironically enough.) --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 00:53, 22 September 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:55:21Z

RSnelik:

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:49:46Z

RSnelik: ?

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:45:14Z

RSnelik:

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:38:51Z

RSnelik:

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:38:17Z

RSnelik: something that finds socialism in a particular country "good" isn't conservative

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:36:08Z

RSnelik:

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:26:24Z

RSnelik:

Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books

2011-09-22T04:25:53Z

RSnelik: a start

Despite non-fiction[[book| books]] being overrun by [[liberal bias]], [[liberal deceit|deceit]], and [[liberal values|distortion]], there are still some great conservative non-fiction books that promote true [[conservative values]].

*'''[[The Bible]]''' - ''the infallible Word of [[God]] contains innumerable conservative values including [[Christian values]]''

United States House of Representatives

2011-09-22T00:37:39Z

RSnelik:

[[Image:6535yttfr.png|right|thumb|Seal of the United States House of Representatives.]]

'''''House of Representatives''' redirects here, for the Australian equivalent see [[Australian House of Representatives]].''

The '''House of Representatives''', often referred to as just "'''The House'''," is the lower chamber of [[Congress]] in which representatives of each state in the union gather. There are 435 voting members of the House, and each serves two year terms. Representatives can be re-elected an unlimited number of times, and indeed, most incumbents who seek re-election are continually successful. <ref>http://www.thirty-thousand.org/pages/QHA-08.htm</ref> Every state has at least one Representative, and are allocated more based on population. For example, [[California]] has 53 Representatives. The House of Representatives meets in the United States [[Capitol]] in [[Washington, D.C.]]

The House's presiding officer is a Representative from the party with the most members currently in the House, and is known as the [[Speaker of the House]]. The current Speaker of the House is [[Republican]] [[John Boehner]], who is from [[Ohio]]. The majority leader is [[Eric Cantor]] and the minority leader is [[Nancy Pelosi]].

While once a proud institution and an important part of the governing process, Republican members of the 112th Congress -also known as the "House Freshmen", or the "Hell No Caucus" are generally considered to have done a great disservice both to the United States Government and to the Institution of the House of Representatives. They have engaged in childish stunts and wasted countless hours with childish activist legislation which has done nothing but waste the time not just of House Members, but also of the US Senate and the President. Polls conducted by a variety of news organizations in the Summer of 2011 register a high degree of disapproval for the behavior of the House Freshmen, and it is widely expected that a majority of those Republican Representatives first elected in 2010 will not be re-elected in 2012.

==Powers of the House==

The Primary role of the House of Representatives is to originate legislation dealing with revenue and the budget, and to draft proposals for new laws to be reviewed by the Senate and the President.

==Current Composition==
*'''Republican Party (Majority): 242 (+0)
*'''Democratic Party (Minority): 193 (+6)
''Numbers in brackets are non-voting members from US territories such as the [[District of Columbia]] and [[Puerto Rico]].

==See also==
* [[Congress]]
* [[The Budget Process]]
* [[Glossary of Budget Terms]]

[[Image:HouseofRepresentatives.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Chamber of the United States House of Representatives.]]

==Bibliography==
* Congressional Quarterly. ''Guide to Congress,'' 6th edition (2007) 1441 pages. CQ is a trustworthy source, achieving a nonpartisan, nonidological factual position
**CQ, ''Student's Guide to the U.S. Congress'' (2008)
* Congressional Quarterly. ''Politics in America: 2008'' (2007); ISBN: 0-87289-547-5 1224pp, covers every member of Congress; [http://www.cqpress.com/product/pia2008.html details and samples]
* Baker, Ross K. ''House and Senate'', 3rd ed. New York: W. W. Norton. (2000).
* Barone, Michael, and Richard E. Cohen. ''The Almanac of American Politics, 2010'' (2009), elaborate detail on every district and member; 1920 pages; new edition every 2 years since 1976
* Davidson, Roger H., and Walter J. Oleszek. (1998). ''Congress and Its Members'', 6th ed. from CQ
* Silverberg, David. ''Congress for Dummies'' (2002) [http://www.amazon.com/Congress-Dummies-David-Silverberg/dp/0764554212/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259667157&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Lee, Frances and Bruce Oppenheimer. ''Sizing Up the Senate: The Unequal Consequences of Equal Representation.'' University of Chicago Press. (1999).
* Tarr, David R., and Ann O'Connor. ''Congress A to Z'' (CQ Congressional Quarterly) (4th ed 2003) 605pp

===History===
*''American National Biography'' (1999), contains biographies of all politicians no longer alive; online edition at academic libraries
* ''Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774-2005.'' 2005. biographical entries for every person who ever served; [http://bioguide.congress.gov Biographical Directory online].
* Carroll, Holbert N. ''The House of Representatives and Foreign Affairs'' 1958 [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=28100337 online edition]
* Davidson, Roger H., Susan Webb Hammond, Raymond W. Smock, eds; ''Masters of the House: Congressional Leadership over Two Centuries'' Westview Press, 1998 [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=58332031 online edition]
* Galloway, George B. ''History of the House of Representatives'' 1962 [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=3071891 online edition]
* MacNeil, Neil. ''Forge of Democracy: The House of Representatives'' (1963) popular history by a well-informed journalist [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=11599068 online edition]
* Remini, Robert V. ''The House: The History of the House of Representatives'' (2006) the standard scholarly history [http://www.amazon.com/House-History-Representatives/dp/B000ULVL1Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200711075&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Strahan, Randall. ''Leading Representatives: The Agency of Leaders in the Politics of the U.S. House'' (2007) focus on [[Henry Clay]], [[Thomas Reed]], and [[Newt Gingrich]]
* Zelizer, Julian E. ''On Capitol Hill: The Struggle to Reform Congress and its Consequences, 1948-2000'' (2004)
* Zelizer, Julian E. ed. ''The American Congress: The Building of Democracy'' (2004), essays by leading scholars [http://www.amazon.com/American-Congress-Building-Democracy/dp/0618179062/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200711146&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]

==References==
<References/>

[[Category:United States Elected Officials]]
[[Category:United States House of Representatives]]
[[Category:DC]]

Hell

2011-09-21T18:40:44Z

RSnelik: /* See also */

[[Image:Hieronymus Bosch - The Garden of Earthly Delights - Hell.jpg|right|300px|thumb|''Hell'', painted by [[Hieronymus Bosch]], part of ''[[The Garden of Earthly Delights]]''.]]
In the English translation of the [[Bible]]'s [[Old Testament]], the word '''Hell''' normally corresponds to the [[Hebrew]] ''sheol'', which was simply the place of the dead. But in the [[Greek]] [[New Testament]] the word used is either ''Gehenna'' (the garbage dump outside the walls of Jerusalem where fires were kept eternally burning to consume the refuse and keep down the stench) or ''Hades'', the [[Greek]]s' dark, gloomy underworld. The modern English word appears to derive most directly from "Hölle" or "Hela" or "Hel", goddess of the dead in Germanic/[[Norse mythology]]. When the [[Anglo-Saxons]] later embraced [[Christianity]], the existing word in the language was reused in the new Christian concepts.

To Christians, Hell is a place where the souls of the wicked are punished eternally for all the [[sins]] they perpetrated during their lifetime on Earth. Since all have sinned (Rom 3:23), Hell can not be avoided on one's own merits, but through the love gift of [[Jesus]] one can know, love, and serve [[God]] and share eternity with Him in [[Heaven]].

The Christian and [[Muslim]] religious traditions often emphasize the ''Gehenna'' aspect: Hell is extremely hot and filled with fire and [[brimstone]]. Opinion varies on the question of whether, while Hell itself is eternal, experience of it purges away the sins of sufferers to the point of eventual redemption. See [[purgatory]]. A minority of Christians do not believe in an eternal Hell as punishment, believing instead that the souls of the wicked are annihilated. This view, which is directly contradicted by Scripture, is referred to as [[Annihilationism]]. Other deniers of Scripture question whether Hell has a literal burning fire, or it is merely separation from God and therefore has the same torment as if there were a burning fire. This view has been supported by writers such as [[J.P. Moreland]], although the Bible clearly contradicts this view and other symbolic interpretations of Hell. It is clearly a real, physical place where the wicked are punished for their sins.

Although Hell is a focus and a concern in Christian theology, the Bible has an even greater focus. In the [[King James Version]] the word Hell is mentioned 54 times, but [[Heaven]] is mentioned 551 times.

* [[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 13:41-42 - ''The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.'''

* Matthew 25:41 - ''Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.''

* Matthew 25:46 - ''And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.''

* [[Gospel of Mark|Mark]] 9:43 - ''And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into Hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched.''

* 2 Thes 1:7-8 - ''And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.''

* [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] 20:10 - ''And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.''

* Revelation 20:14-15 - ''And death and Hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.''

== See also ==
* [[Dante's Inferno]]
* [[Mystery:What Percentage Go To Hell?|What percentage of people go to Hell?]]

[[Category:Abrahamic Religions]]

Athiesm and obesity

2011-09-20T20:29:08Z

RSnelik: Redirected page to Atheism and obesity

#REDIRECT [[Atheism and obesity]]

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative TV Shows

2011-09-20T04:28:00Z

RSnelik: /* Conservative humour */

== Six Million Dollar Man ==

The technology could have been developed by private companies under contract with the government.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:18, 25 May 2011 (EDT)
:It "could've" been a lot of things, and I would gladly concede the point given any evidence to back up such an assertion. But as I recall, the protagonist was an astronaut who was "put back together" by the OSI (a fictional government agency) and worked in the public service thereafter. [[User:LloydR|LloydR]] 18:29, 25 May 2011 (EDT)

== Star Trek ==

The Federation was an extremely [[socialist]] government, to the point where the very concept of money was downright offensive to humans. Furthermore, the only "[[capitalist]]" race in Star Trek--the Ferengi--started off as villains in the early TNG episodes before becoming comic relief pn DS9. --[[User:AdamDiscordia|[[User:AdamDiscordia|Yours in Christ, Adam Discordia]]]] 00:08, 26 May 2011 (EDT)

: Sounds like Star Trek should be downgraded to "Debatable Whether Conservative." Please feel free to move it ... but "Trekies" may not like that!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 26 May 2011 (EDT)

== The Simpsons? ==
This may be a long shot but could the Simpsons fit under the Debatable category? Although it does occasionally send liberal messages, it embraces very conservative family values. I'm just not sure whether or not its liberal messages exclude it entirely from being included here. --[[User:JimMac|JimMac]] 09:31, 26 May 2011 (EDT)

: Personally, I don't any value -- conservative or otherwise -- in the ''Simpsons''. I think it presents [[Hollywood]]'s negative caricature of the family, as several other sitcoms have. But I welcome comments by others about this show, and thanks for the suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:23, 26 May 2011 (EDT)
::I would agree - showing a dysfunctional family is hardly conservative. It would be like saying the abysmal "Married with children" is conservative. [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 11:21, 26 May 2011 (EDT)

==Action shows==
I'm thinking about shows from my youth, such as CHiPs - which portrays law enforcement in a positive light, while wholesome lead characters and little violence, and MacGuyver, again a show with little violence and a character using Yankee ingenuity to extract himself from a tight situation. [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 11:21, 26 May 2011 (EDT)

== King Of the Hill ==

Definitely conservative...its definitely the most realistic modern cartoon show and the Hill family is Republican (but not demonized for being so). [[User:RichDunbar|RichDunbar]] 23:50, 28 May 2011 (EDT)

== Storage Wars ==

Emphasizes [[capitalism|capitalist]] and [[free market]] values. Plus on another level, it illustrates the importance of [[personal responsibility]]; the lockers that are being auctioned off belonged to people who decided not to pay their bills. --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 16:43, 7 July 2011 (EDT)

== ''Pawn Stars'' ==

While it does prove the free market prevails, the show contains a great deal of profanity.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:04, 21 July 2011 (EDT)

== Conservative humour ==

I am sorry if this is a silly (or repeated) question but how do you define conservative humour? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:41, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
:My personal definition is humor that shows the irony and extreme folly in following [[liberal values|liberal beliefs]]. [[Conservative humor and satire resources|There's a lot of good stuff out there]]. [[User:RSnelik|RSnelik]] 00:28, 20 September 2011 (EDT)

==The Office==
I am not sure about this one. While Ryan is clearly a caricature of liberal hypocrite, the show is still mocking conservatives like Dwight and Angela (who is an conservative hypocrite). The best presented characters (Jim & Pam) are clearly liberals.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 23:43, 19 September 2011 (EDT)

Verification

2011-09-20T04:24:08Z

RSnelik: expanding

'''Verification''' is the testing of an [[hypothesis]] or alternative hypotheses through observation or experimentation. It is readily overlooked by [[evolution|evolutionist]] [[science|scientists]] in the effort to take out [[God]] from natural phenomena. [[Liberal|Liberals]] also avoid verification because they know it will only invalidate their [[liberal deceit|positions]] and confirm [[conservative|conservatives]]' positions.

"Trust but verify" was President [[Ronald Reagan]]'s favorite approach towards the [[communism|communist]] [[Soviet Union]]. He repeated his phrase again in his farewell address to the nation in 1989:<ref>http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/farewell.asp</ref>

:''"We must keep up our guard, but we must also continue to work together to lessen and eliminate tension and mistrust. My view is that President Gorbachev is different from previous Soviet leaders. I think he knows some of the things wrong with his society and is trying to fix them. We wish him well. And we'll continue to work to make sure that the Soviet Union that eventually emerges from this process is a less threatening one. What it all boils down to is this. I want the new closeness to continue. And it will, as long as we make it clear that we will continue to act in a certain way as long as they continue to act in a helpful manner. If and when they don't, at first pull your punches. If they persist, pull the plug. It's still '''trust but verify'''. It's still play, but cut the cards. It's still watch closely. And don't be afraid to see what you see."''

== References ==

<references/>

[[category:political Terms]]
[[category:science]]

Talk:Atheism and obesity

2011-09-18T21:38:31Z

RSnelik: /* Might be of interest */

[[Talk:Atheism and obesity/Archive1|Archive1]]

== Via several weird redirected talk pages... ==

Ken, you realize the reason Penn won't debate you is that he suspects you are a parodist ''extraordinaire'', right? It's not because he is a bunny, or a burning building, it's because he thinks you edit here to discredit CP. Can you write an essay that proves this wrong?

Best regards,

Huw [[User:Human|Human]] 02:57, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:::[[Essay: This year's best atheist debaters]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:17, 4 August 2011 (EDT)

:Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? On the talk-pages I've seen so far you havn't won any ''discussion''...
:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:54, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar, I think you are an [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno atheist/evolutionist black knight] and can safely be ignored. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:39, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
::This is a prime example of another argument you just lost:A You won't win any debate by just ignoring your opponents: it's like your [[Question evolution! campaign]] in Texas - what good does it do ''contact Texas churches'', that's not where the atheists you are trying to convert hang out!
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:47, 4 August 2011 (EDT)

::To explain the above in detail: if there were some example of a discussion on a talk page where you, Conservative, have successfully debated an atheist/Darwinist/Evolutionist, you would have no problem to link to it. The fact that you don't do so, but instead choose an [[ad hominem]] as an answer implies that
::- there isn't such a discussion or
::- if there is, you have lost.
::And that's why you were able to lose this simple argument in two sentences - congratulations!
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:53, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::I find it interesting that members of a certain atheist website incessantly whine about this article. Is there any leader or are there any leaders of that atheist website who could easily shed some poundage? The reason I mention this is that generally speaking the stuck pig squeals the loudest. :) I do know that a significant percentage of the leaders of the [[New Atheism]] movement had problems with being overweight (see: [[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]] ). I also know that a number of [[American Atheists]]'s board of directors could benefit by losing some weight as can be seen [http://www.atheists.org/about/Board_of_Directors HERE]. Instead of whining about this article, I do think that some atheists could better spend their time by asking prominent atheist "fat cats" to lose some weight. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:25, 5 August 2011 (EDT)

::::::*A stuck pig squeals - whether it was stuck rightfully or not. You know, sometimes the innocent protest, too.
::::::*You didn't answer my question (''Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.?'') but again went on a tangent.
::::::*BTW, is this the way you intent to ''win'' debates: hinting that your opposite is fat - or that he knows some fat people?
::::::*Try to regard our little exchange of comments as a discussion. Reread it. Reflect on it. Could you answer any of the questions? How many valid points have you made? (The answer is '''none''')
::::::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:40, 5 August 2011 (EDT)

::::::: *cough* I am a Christian conservative, and I must say that this discussion has made me curious. Conservative, why aren't you just giving this guy examples of debates you've won if you have them? I mean, I don't ''want'' you to be wrong or anything, but this is just confusing, and frankly, this discussion has almost proven to me that RonLar is right and not you, Conservative. ''Why not just release whatever debates you have?'' And RonLar DOES have a fine, perfectly fair question. All he wants is an example of where you debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, or a related topic. That request shouldn't be too hard to fulfill. Even if he is an atheist, that doesn't make his question less valid. --[[User:StoryMaker|StoryMaker]] 17:18, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::StoryMaker, I will let readers decide if you are a bona fide Christian conservative. Personally, I am skeptical. Next, this talk page is for the [[atheism and obesity]] article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:22, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Ah, an ''ad hominem'', again. And still - after a month - the question ''Could you give us an example where you, Conservative, (successfully) debated someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.?'' is unanswered, or, to be more precise, it is implicitly answered '''no'''... [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Ron, what would you call a "successful" debate? It seems to me that debates rarely finish with one party saying "I was wrong, you have changed my mind", no matter how comprehensively they are out-argued, so perhaps it is unfair to ask Conservative to produce such an example. (This is particularly true online, where obstinacy abounds.) In my view, a truly "successful" debate is one containing absorbing dialog that advances or deepens the understanding of all parties - and examples of these can be found all over Conservapedia talk pages.
:::::::::Perhaps now you could take this case as closed and move on to another issue?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:58, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

My previous comment seemed to be not civil enough, so I try to rephrase my statement: I'm well aware that ''successfully'' is a quite ambiguous term, and I don't want to put to much into it. On various occasions has User:Conservative expressed his desire to debate atheists and/or evolutionist like [[Richard Dawkins]] and [[Penn Jillette]]. He (or even she!) chooses not to bolster his stature by citing any off-site activity or qualification, so the seriousness of his challenges can only be measured by his contributions to this site.

He has created ample content. But the talk pages give you a perfect arena for an actual debate (especially as User:Conservative seems to have a virtual event in mind when he ushers his challenges). So, what is more natural then to look for a discussion on these talk pages to see how good a debater User:Conservative is? As I couldn't find an example of such a discussion where User:Conservative faired well, I asked him to provide me with such an example, i.e., his best shot(s) on these debate grounds.

An impressive amount of such debates would help to take User:Conservative's challenges more serious. But unfortunately User:Conservative hasn't provided me with a link yet.

Thanks, [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 14:18, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

== Nominate for deletion ==

I'd like to propose that this article should be deleted; we could use a shortened version as a section of the "Atheism and health" article. It's just not solid enough to be a standalone article, and frankly it also lets atheists accuse Conservapedia of relying on ad hominems. Are we trying to provide a valuable educational resource or just insult atheists? Some people are far too quick to label atheists as malevolent, insane or abnormal. Well, most of them aren't; they're simply people who don't believe in God and they're generally well educated and intelligent. Some of them are going to take us seriously if we can present good, reasoned arguments. However if the best we can do is to call them fat bum bandits they're just going to laugh at us and so, I'm afraid to say, based on conversations I've had with friends from church about what I've been trying to do here, are a lot of Christians. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 19:28, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
:::SamCoulter, before your suggestion is given merit, I think you need to do a better job at refuting the data in the article plus show that atheist community has adequately addressed their sin problem and the problems sin is causing within their community. By the way SamCoulter, what does the Bible say about atheists and what does the Bible say about fools? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:00, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::::As has been pointed out on numerous occasions the data in the article mentions neither atheism nor obesity. As for the atheist community's sin problem, if there IS an atheist community sin isn't a concept that will have any meaning to it so they're not going to see a problem. Sin is going against God's law, so the issue of atheists and their attitude to sin can be fairly easily deduced from that. I know what the bible says about atheists and I know what it says about fools - essentially that they're the same thing - but what do atehists care about what the bible says? They don't care if it says that they're fools and I do believe it's their minds that we should be trying to change here. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:12, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

===An idea===
Why don't we have a vote on whether this should remain an article of be moved to essay? We'd have disqualify users who haven't been here awhile to stop vandals and the like swinging the vote. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:24, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I'm happy to be excluded from that vote because I've only been here a month or so, but I think it's an excellent idea. As an essay, a personal opinion, it's perfectly reasonable. As an encyclopaedia article? Not so much. Conservapedia has massive potential - and I'll say right now that User:Conservative has been quite helpful to me in my efforts to improve it - but this article WOULD be better as an essay. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 21:37, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, before you invoke [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XqZjAybWXk mob rule], why don't you point to a single factual error in the article first? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:08, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:Firstly I was explicitly against mob rule by stating it should only be trusted user to vote. Second: ''why don't you point to a single factual error in the article first?''....I have! You have ignored it time and time again! The entire page is predicated on a survey '''that doesn't mention atheism or obesity!''' That, sir, is a factual error! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:18, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
::I have tried having this conversation with you many times - look at some of my comments above '''the Gallup study does not support the conclusion'''. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:19, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Max, there is a number of bodies of evidence (some of them very corpulent) that I presented in the 24 pages of material for this article. :) Stop using the [[fallacy of exclusion]] and deal with the entire WEIGHT of evidence that the atheist community has problems with obesity within their community. :) By the way, I do find it telling that you cannot find a single factual error in the 24 page article. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:23, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Stop moving the goalposts Conservative. You asked me to find a single error and I have found a single error. It is not a fallacy of exclusion, you asked and I answered. The Gallup Study '''does not''' support your conclusion. That is a single error and that is all you asked me point out. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:29, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, we both know you found nothing. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:Conservative, can you not find ''anything'' positive to write about regarding fat people? You've worked hard to tie us to atheists, homosexuals, lesbians, evolutionists, feminists and Alzheimer's (that I know of), but nothing that a conservative Christian would consider good. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 02:03, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Sharon, the topic of the article is [[Atheism and obesity]]. The question you pose is beyond the scope of the article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Pardon my confusion about the topic, because this article meanders from '''obesity''' to fat homosexuals to '''neurotic fat people who must be atheists because they obviously have mental and emotional issues''', to various '''"nanner-nanner, you're fat" sections on atheists''', to Chuck Norris talking about the internet, '''to internet atheism, to more "nanner-nanner, you're fat" sections''', back to fat homosexuals, then to fat lesbians, to chubby homosexuals, to fat evolutionists, '''back to neurotic, depressed fat people must be atheists''', to fat people can't get married, to physical ailments fat people get, to fat Alzheimer's patients, to fat people believing in UFOs because they lack self-discipline, to more UFO stuff (seriously, ''UFOs''?), to giving statistics about the growth of Christianity, to Chuck Norris saying fat people are horrid,''' to overcoming obesity by being a Christian, and finally to a list of pages making fun of fat atheists'''. The way I see it, the bolded sections are the only ones with a tenuous connection to the title of this article.

:::::But I believe you answered my question anyway, so I thank you for that. It's really too bad you can't find ''any'' good in people with weight issues. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::::::I think a lot of Conservative's articles are made to be thought-provoking - to ask you to think about things you might not normally consider. [[User:Taj|Taj]] 12:20, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Well, I agree this ''started'' as thought provoking but when finding out that the very source the entire thrust of this article hangs on neither mentions obesity or atheism it stops become thought provoking and becomes fallacious. When this is then pointed out to the author who completely ignores it it becomes an embarrassment. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:50, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Max, when are you going to show 3 things: 1) The entire thrust of the article hangs on the Gallup study. 2) It is wrong to provide data on the very religious 3) There is a marked difference between the non-religious and atheists (I leave this question up to the readers). Seeing as the article has over 20 pages of material with various bodies of data, I think #1 is impossible for you to maintain. On the other hand, being in clear error has never stopped you before. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::How many surveys in this article draw a relation between physical health and religious beliefs? I can only see one - the Gallup Study. Hence the entire premise, that atheism and obesity are somehow correlated, hang on the Gallup study. I am happy to be proven wrong. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:13, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::Please show me where I have been "in clear error" before and I will happily apologise for it. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:15, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, you need help that I cannot provide and I suggest going to a optometrist. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:36, 14 September 2011 (EDT)
:Since you cannot show me another study, in this article, relating to health and religiosity, then I will stand by my original comments. I will gladly apologise if wrong but at this stage there is a critical flaw in the article. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:45, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

==it must be a joke==
Come on, this article is just nonsense, I clearly suspect Conservative to be a parodist. You cannot just list fifty fat atheist and say that ALL atheists are fat, that's just WRONG! I can easily find 50 fit ahteist and conclude that ALL atheists are fit ! Another interesting fact should be to compare obesity rate in Europe and America and then to compare atheism in Europe and America. More atheists in Europe but more obeses in America ? What should I conclude here ? --[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 01:16, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Where does the article say all atheists are fat? Secondly, comparing apples to apples is more scientific in terms of isolating the variable of religiousness/atheistic. For example, comparing very religious European people to European atheists. You can also do statistical analysis to measure particular variables. I suggest taking remedial reading classes plus taking a few courses in statistics.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:21, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Obesity by states: [http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html]. Intersting to see that more religious states are those with the more obese people. Conclusion: either religious people are fatter, either atheists living with religious people get fatter than atheists living with atheists. Another study arguing for fatter christians: [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42256829/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/#.TnJ9RuzDGZ8]. Personnaly I believe that you can be fat or fit whether you are a christian, an atheist, a buddhist or whatever you want.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 18:35, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::ARamis, the Feinstein study you linked to only showed a correlation between obesity and how religious people were AS YOUNG ADULTS; he didn't check how religious the obese subjects are NOW. Nevertheless as far as its conclusions go it seems valid and it's one more reason why this article should be deleted. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 12:23, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::That would be great for you if we lived world with one or two variables. Unfortunately for you, we don't. I am used to atheists not understanding statistics and science so I am not upset. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:39, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Oh Conservative, please explain to me where I failed, please excuse my pride for daring oppose the Conservapedia "facts". Please provide your statistical data (where is it?) that would open my eyes to the Truth.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 18:56, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::ARamis, you do have a pride issue as demonstrated by your lack of apology for incorrectly declaring the article supposedly said all atheist are fat. I see no point in having a discussion with someone who is reluctant to graciously admit error. Second, my post above dealt with your obesity by states "argument". I see now you posted a link the MSNBC article. Third, the NorthWestern study was already discussed (see above). I have nothing further to add on this point. Lastly, I think its pointless to have discussions with atheists on this matter who refuse to tackle the article in a more comprehensive manner as I see it as merely engaging in [[fallacy of exclusion]] "reasoning". [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:31, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Some observations ==

I know that this hardly counts as a scientific study, but out of interest I went through the list of speakers at The Amazing Meeting 9, a sceptical and atheist event that was held in Las Vegas in July, and checked photos of all the speakers. To reduce the variables as much as possible I considered only American speakers, of whom there were 36. Of these, FOUR (PZ Myers, Pamela Gay, Heidi Anderson and Maria Walters) appeared to be seriously overweight or obese, and Pamela Gay is not an atheist. As a third of US adults are obese this (admittedly crude) study suggests that it is not a problem linked in any significant way to atheism. If anybody can suggest a way to look at this in more detail I'd be happy to do what I can. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 12:34, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::SamCoulter, for the sake of discussion lets assume that is true. With that being said, it depends on who you are comparing contemporary American atheists to. Are you comparing them to Jesus? Are you comparing the founders of the New Atheism movement to the American general public (3 out of 5 of the founders of the New Atheism movement have had problems with being overweight)? Are you comparing them to the very religious? Are you comparing them to the the bulk of Christianity which is in the non-Western World? Are you comparing them to Moses who certainly had a lot to say about diet? In any event, atheists say they believe in science and we know what science says about obesity (medical science, nutritional science and exercise science). Certainly a group of prominent atheists being prominent in the waist is an embarrassment especially since many atheists claim two things: atheism is in accordance with good science and theism is not and atheists are intellectually superior. BY the way, given that being overweight/obese is a causal factor for brain impairment, an overeweight/obese atheist claiming intellectual superiority is problematic. Lastly, since some atheists probably believe that society is evolving upward, contemporary American atheists being more overweight than mankind was in general earlier is problematic as well. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::::No, atheists say that they DON'T believe in God. The majority of them certainly are attached to the scientific method, but then again so are the majority of western Christians. I don't think we help ourselves by misrepresenting what atheists believe. For the record I am comparing prominent American atheists to the US population in general, and it doesn't look like they're any more prone to obesity. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 13:39, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Sam, you didn't adequately respond to my posts that atheism is more than merely not believing in God which I thought was very shoddy. Second, I cite: "Social Darwinism claims that society is evolving upward from our primitive beginnings to the point where we reach a state of utopia."[http://mnorthernlights.blogspot.com/2009/01/darwin-day-2009.html] Certainly, highly religious Bible believers do not believe in social Darwinism so time periods of atheists getting plumper are not problematic to biblical Christianity. Also, how attached are overweight/obese atheists to the scientific method? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:50, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Atheists say that's what atheism is, and the difference between not believing in gods and denying the existence of gods is in any case more semantic than anything else: Me: "Do you deny the existence of God?" Atheist: "Yes." Me: "Why?" Atheist: "Because I don't believe in gods." Social Darwinism has nothing to do with the theory of evolution and claiming that it does just gives evolutionists an opening to attack your credibility. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 14:00, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::Do atheists say what atheism is or do encyclopedias of philosophy? If someone says they are Napolean is he? Why is the definition more semantic than anything else and how does it affect the burden of proof as far as the existence of God? Next, where did I say Social Darwinism is the exactly the same as macroevolution? The more I interact with you and you fail to adequately respond to my questions and the material I post to you, the less worthwhile I am finding it to respond to you. Don't be surprised if I cease to respond to you. Perhaps, you should consider adequately responding to the backlog of questions I have posed to you and more adequately respond to what I have posted to you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:11, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::My opinion is that atheists get to say what it is. Your opinion is clearly different; fine, that's your right. However if someone says "I'm an atheist," and you say "Then according to my encyclopaedia of philosophy you believe X" and he replies "Well, I don't," what does that mean? That he's lying, that he's not an atheist or that your encyclopaedia is wrong? Secondly, I never claimed that you DID say social Darwinism is exactly the same as macroevolution; I just pointed out that it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with evolutionary theory, because it doesn't. Finally, we seem to have a different perception on whether or not I've adequately responded to your questions and again that is your right, but it's also mine. No offence, but there are some questions - such as why is this article based on a study that talks about neither atheism nor obesity - that you haven't answered too well yourself. I am NOT trying to get into a fight with you or anyone else here; I am trying to expand Conservapedia into a valuable educational resource that will turn people away from atheism and evolutionism, as are you. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 14:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

== Challenge for User:Conservative ==

''BY the way, given that obesity is a causal factor for brain impairment, an obese atheist claiming intellectual superiority is problematic.'' quote by [[User:Conservative]]

So now you claim there are no smart fat people. Wow, just... wow.

70 to 76% of Americans self-identify as Christian. 2-5% of Americans self-identify as atheists. 33.8% of Americans are overweight/obese. There is obviously a much greater problem within the Christian community than in the atheist community, by sheer numbers alone, yet Conservapedia turns a blind eye to this issue. It also ignores "normal weight obesity", where skinny people can be fatties without even knowing it.

You keep challenging people to debate you on atheism. Well, I'm not an atheist, and I don't know much about that subject, but I ''am'' overweight. I'm challenging you to a debate about how horribly Conservapedia treats obese people in their articles. Simple rules - written responses with one post (no edits); the topic is '''''just obesity''''', not atheism, homosexuality, evolutionism, feminism, etc. and so forth (I can't remember all the labels you've tried to slap on fat people); answers due the last Saturday of October. You can pick the moderator.

Or I'll post my phone number and you can tell me in person why you '''''flat-out ignore''''' the fat Christians or the fat creationists or the fat heterosexuals or all of the intelligent, talented , good, nice fat people who live in this country in your diatribes. I'll pay for the phone call. Whichever one you want to choose is fine with me. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 14:08, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Sharon, where did a claim that there are no smart/talented/etc. overweight/obese people? I didn't and I don't think it is fair for you to misrepresent what I have written. For example, certainly it is possible in some cases for someone starting with an IQ of 200 to suffer brain impairment, yet still be smart. In terms of "intellectual superiority", it all depends on who you are comparing a person to. Plus, we really don't to what degree many health related weight problems are so Conservapedia offering material on the affects of excess weight plus various solutions for many people's problems with being overweight is a public service. I do know that in many cases the health effects of being overweight in terms of symptoms can be reversed to a large degree via weight loss. Also, given that many maladies are progressive in terms of their effects, it is better for people to be educated on the effects of being overweight sooner rather than later. Next, given that I cite responsible sources for my articles in terms of their claims such as medical journals citing research, etc., I see no reason to debate you. If you had claimed that specific statements in my articles were wrong and attempted to offer evidence to the contrary that might be different, but this is not the case plus I have used responsible sources for my articles such as medical journals citing research, etc. Lastly, thanks for the offer to have a phone discussion, but I think I will decline at this time. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:57, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

:::::::No, you haven't actually ''written'' the words that there are no smart/talented/etc. overweight/obese people, you have simply ''implied'' it. Reread the quote at the top of this section. Look at the articles you've written that associate obesity with things that you don't believe in. Look at the articles you've '''''not''''' written about obesity - the fact that there is an issue within the Christian community; that it's an issue among heterosexuals, etc.; that there is some debate on whether a person can be overweight and still be healthy; that thin people can also be considered to have "normal weight obesity". I haven't argued about the medical information you've provided - it's the ''application'' of that information that I'm protesting. You use "obese" as a pejorative, and that's not right. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 20:24, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Sharon, I am not going to spend time addressing what I supposedly said "between the lines", implied, etc. If my critics don't want to show me where I made a mistake in what I actually wrote then so be it. Secondly, if you want to open a debate page entitled "Can a person be overweight and still be healthy?" then please be my guest. Given the massive amount of research that has been done on the effects of being overweight by the medical community and the biblical admonitions against overeating, I think you face an uphill battle but if you want to fight this battle with those who disagree with you, then so be it. Also, how can being overweight be an issue within a community as you suggest above, but still be healthy? Over in overweight means too much. If there are no adverse effects to being overweight (unhealthy to be overweight), then are they '''over'''weight? If you want to address the central issue, then I suggest you open the debate page I suggested. If you do open such a debate page, I would suggest you provide counter evidence to each of the sources I used on the effects of being overweight (effect on longevity, effects on brain function, etc. etc. etc. ). I do realize that there are health risks associated with being underweight and that health is more than just BMI/weight and that mortality does not necessarily mean quality of life (joint problems associated with being overweight, impaired brain function, etc.), but I don't think you can show me that any of the information I presented were examples of healthy lifestyles being shown as unhealthy. ([[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:14, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
Sharon, I might have used another Conservapedians claims/source about BMI rather than use my own and a responsible source seems to have been used. If I did use another Conservapedians BMI source, I used a BMI of over 25 as being overweight. Here is something I just read from a 2010 source: "After analyzing data on 1.46 million mostly white, non-Hispanic adults who participated in 19 long-term studies — each designed to follow participants for between 5 to 28 years — researchers determined that, overall, a BMI (or body mass index, a ratio of height and weight that determines overweight and obesity) between 20.0 and 24.9 was associated with the lowest risk of death in healthy non-smoking adults." [http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/03/whats-the-ideal-bmi-for-longevity] The [[Mayo Clinic]] which has a high reputation for giving sound health advice concurs with this figure. [http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bmi-calculator/NU00597] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:12, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
:::One last thing, this is a volunteer wiki and people can within reason choose the topics of the articles they write on depending on their interests and what they feel the public might be interested in and use such things as the Conservapedia commandments in order to have a good article (cite sources, etc.). If you want to do the requisite amount of research an write good articles on topics such as [[Heterosexuality and obesity]], etc. etc. then be my guest. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually, I'm planning two articles: [[Negative stereotypes in society and obesity]] and [[Christian and weight issues]]. The first is prevelant (see [[atheism and obesity]], with its numerous pictures of atheists, dictators, murderers, etc., and not one person who has a positive reputation with Christians], and the second is actually a greater problem than [[atheism and obesity]], given that Christians are supposed to follow the Bible's teachings, as you've pointed out. I'm sure there are numerous examples for both articles. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:50, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I did some poking around the internet. If you write the articles, I would suggest not titling an article [[Christian and weight issues]] as it does not seem to be a popular search engine search so people will not find your article. Also, based on Google suggestions, here are some more prevalent searches via the search engines if you want to write on this topic: [[Obesity stereotypes]] and [[Christian weight loss]] and [[Christian weight loss programs]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:23, 18 September 2011 (EDT)

== Might be of interest ==

An interesting comparison of [http://blog.hunch.com/?p=48884 dietary habits]. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:26, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
:That seems like a liberal-run sight trying to make conservatives look unhealthy and unsophisticated. They way it's written appears very deceptive. [[User:RSnelik|RSnelik]] 17:38, 18 September 2011 (EDT)

Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-09-14T00:43:16Z

RSnelik: Mrs Robinson

There are many brilliant—and popular—conservative songs.

Here is our growing list:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Song
!Artist
!Comments
!Billboard Rank
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L--cqAI3IUI ''Wouldn't It Be Nice'']
|The [[Beach Boys]]
|Pro-marriage
|8
|-
|[http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Crying-in-the-Chapel-lyrics-Elvis-Presley/E547D833F0BBFADF48256874002B3358 ''Crying In The Chapel'']
|[[Elvis Presley]]
|Pro-marriage
|1
|-
|[http://www.ixlyrics.com/CLIVE-DUNN/GRANDAD.html ''Grandad'']
|Clive Dunn
|UK Number 1 hit, in praise of senior citizens and their values
|
|-
|[http://youtu.be/EgkBx8csEws ''Goodbye, Yellow Brick Road'']
|[[Elton John]]
|The same message as the [[Prodigal Son]]: look objectively at our own lives, and realize that "I should have listened to my old man."
|2
|-
|[http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/jones-george/gods-gonna-get-cha-for-that-6638.html ''God's Gonna Get 'Cha For That'']
|Tammy Wynette & George Jones
|You cannot escape God's gaze, no matter who you are
|25
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iYY2FQHFwE ''Okie From Muskogee'']
|[[Merle Haggard]]
|Anti-drug and anti-hippie; a song about praising the traditional American values in Mid-America. Was written in response to the Vietnam War protests and counter-culture movement.
|1 (Billboard Hot Country)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl6yilkU1LI ''Fast Car'']
|Tracy Chapman
|Self-help, free market, division of labor, and a criticism of alcohol. "I know things will get better/You'll find work and I'll get promoted/We'll move out of the shelter/Buy a bigger house and live in the suburbs"
|6
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5RkzbHb-w ''You Can't Hurry Love (You Just Have to Wait)'']
|The Supremes
|Abstinence for rock fans. Also performed by Phil Collins.
|1
|-
|[http://youtu.be/o-z2D9lo9-8 ''Bush Was Right'']
|The Right Brothers
|Celebrating the Bush Administration's success and policies.
|
|-
|[http://youtu.be/BvPugOWeZiA ''Let It Be'']
|[[The Beatles]]
|Very popular in Russia under the Soviets
|1
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6yLQRF-cEU ''Have You Forgotten?'']
|Darryl Worley
|Patriotic response to [[September 11, 2001 attacks]].<ref>http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=15568</ref>
|1 (US Country)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5aMMRes2u4 ''Still the One'']
|Orleans
|A tribute to fidelity in relationships.
|5
|-
|[http://youtu.be/oHg5SJYRHA0 ''Sweet Home Alabama'']
|[[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]
|A response to hippie culture. Defends Southerners from stereotyped attacks by [[liberal]], Canadian rocker Neil Young. "Well, I hope Neil Young will remember/A Southern man don't need him around anyhow."
|8
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-1_d6bbM1I ''My Love'']
|[[Petula Clark]]
|A Christian love in secular form.
|1
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16u0wwCfoJ4 ''I Fought the Law (and the Law Won)'']
|The Crickets
|Its title says it all. The version by ''The Clash'' has a particularly good tempo.
|9 (Bobby Fuller Four version)
|-
|[http://youtu.be/cMfrLFirGWc ''Chapel of Love'']
|Dixie Cups
|Marriage in a church
|1
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0heL2Czeraw ''I Am America'']
|Krista Branch
|American [[Tea Party Movement]] Song
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT88jBAoVIM ''Amazing Grace'']
|[[John Newton]]
|A Christian hymn published in 1779.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IStlBOX9F4o ''God's Gonna Cut You Down'']
|Traditional
|"Go tell that long tongue liar, go and tell that midnight rider, tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter, tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down"
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/pEnLNWoln1c ''Anything Goes'']
|Guns N' Roses
|A blatant message about the dangers of premarital sex
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/6j7huh5Egew ''Seven Nation Army'']
|The White Stripes
|A song about the growing power of conservatism
|1 (Hot Modern Rock Tracks)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwBirf4BWew ''Stand By Your Man'']
|[[Tammy Wynette]]
|Don't expect [[feminists]] to like that one! Or [[Hillary Clinton]]!
|1 (Hot Country Singles)
|-
|[http://youtu.be/r5Q8Xa0bPy8''Battle Hymn of the Republic'']
|[[Lee Greenwood]]
|"As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free."
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/lnk8SKD9zcA''You Light Up My Life'']
|Debby Boone
|One of the biggest hits ever, but [[liberals]] omit that this song is about [[Jesus]].
|1
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np0solnL1XY ''Free Bird'']
|Lynyrd Skynyrd
|Because [[Conservatives]] want a free country, and [[liberals]] are in love with [[communism]].
|19
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ0oCmDXrVk&mode=related&search= ''Jerusalem'']
|William Blake / Sir Hubert Parry
|Don't let the sword sleep in the hand.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wahd2piIr4Q ''Brothers In Arms'']
|[[Dire Straits]]
|We're fools to make war on our brothers in arms.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeWZhuzFMM8 ''The Ascent of Stan'']
|[[Ben Folds]]
|Tells the story of a former "textbook hippie man" who realizes that he has become everything that he was protesting against.
|NA
|-
|''Starting All Over Again''
|[[Petula Clark]]
|Keep moving onward, even in the most difficult of times.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/bCFWyLwcR6E ''Thank You My Lord'']
|[[Petula Clark]]
|The title says it all.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/7NJMTmz7pkg ''Brick'']
|Ben Folds Five
|Shows the regret involved in abortion.
|6 (Modern Rock Tracks)
|-
|[http://youtu.be/Dw6qmYX1ny4 ''Alive'']
|P.O.D.
|About being thankful for the gift of life.
|2 (US Alternative)
|-
|[http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/serve.html ''Gotta Serve Somebody'']
|[[Bob Dylan]]
|"It may be the devil or it may be the Lord."
|24
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lydBPm2KRaU ''Jesus, Take The Wheel'']
|[[Carrie Underwood]]
|A gospel-themed hit from the American Idol winner.
|1 (US Country)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPBwXKgDTdE ''Mine'']
|[[Taylor Swift]]
|Talks about how her parents stooped to [[liberal values]] and divorced, and how she doesn't want that to happen with the guy she meets, dates, and marries.
|1 (US Adult Contemporary)
|-
|[http://youtu.be/FAvQSkK8Z8U ''Red Barchetta'']
|[[Rush]]
|Tells the story of a future with excessive regulation, where even driving is illegal.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/K5N2WJ1szHE ''Father of Mine'']
|Everclear
|A reminder of the importance of good parenting. Everclear singer Art Alexakis wrote much of his material from his own perspective of a troubled childhood. At the end of the song, Alexakis promises to be a better father than his own had been.
|4
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maz9ddxEQnM ''Taxman'']
|[[The Beatles]]
|George Harrison said, "Taxman was when I first realized that even though we had started earning money, we were actually giving most of it away in taxes."
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4eonyfRet8&feature=related ''Back in the U.S.A.'']
|[[Chuck Berry]]
|A patriotic song about missing life in the U.S.A.
|16
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZVPv9B-ZlM ''Government Cheese'']
|The Rainmakers
|Humorous spoof of welfare.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErPywgiMb4k ''Angry Young Man'']
|[[Billy Joel]]
|The doctrinaire leftist radical with "his fist in the air and his head in the sand" comes in for biting criticism.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzU2iJ9qfXg ''Gimme Back My Bullets'']
|[[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]
|The name says it all.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPPlGFh6OpQ ''Spirit In The Sky'']
|Norman Greenbaum
|
|3
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38oeBgvbMYA ''Don't Let 'Em Take Your Gun'']
|Grand Funk Railroad
|A father gives his son some sage advice.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=096LhjGNNCk ''Something For Nothing'']
|Rush
|"You can't get something for nothing, you can't have freedom for free."
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/kD5M_i6JceU ''Neighborhood Bully'']
|[[Bob Dylan]]
|Israel's right to exist and defend itself.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2duiu0W_TSA&feature=fvst ''New Divide'']
|Linkin Park
|Depicts a typical scenario of conservatives having to defend themselves from unreasonable liberal attacks and the ever-widening divide between the two ideologies.
|1
|-
|[http://youtu.be/4ZEE8utquP8 ''Get it Right the First Time'']
|Louisiana's LeRoux
|Wealthy Georgia politician is placed in high office and turns out to be a puppet with no ideas of his own. Released in 1980 when Jimmy Carter was up for re-election.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/QCQTr8ZYdhg ''Wish You Were Here'']
|Pink Floyd
|A song about wishing that a conservative president would return back to office.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2UE5g72s0o ''Yours Is No Disgrace'']
|[[Yes]]
|Written to, and about, the troops headed for Vietnam.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/zapGC2PrWiU ''Fair Exchange''] and [http://youtu.be/cnijc9wNpV4 ''Sparks of the Tempest'']
|[[Kansas (band)|Kansas]]
|Warnings about totalitarian governments who want to take away your freedom in the name of utopia. Also much of their early 80s material, which has Christian lyrics.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/OtZ5YsvREi4 ''In America'']
|The [[Charlie Daniels]] Band
|Patriotism makes a comeback in response to the Iran hostage crisis and Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
|11
|-
|''Storm the Embassy''
|The Stray Cats
|Another conservative song about the Iran hostage crisis. "Fifteen man taken captive in a hostile foreign land/Scorchin' sun beaming down onto miles and miles of sand..."
|NA
|-
|''We Must Take America Back''
|Steve Vaus
|Became an underground country music hit in 1992 after RCA dropped him and took the album out of print due to the political lyrics.
|NA
|-
|''Renegade''
|[[Steppenwolf]]
|[[John Kay]]'s childhood escape from Communist [[East Germany]].
|NA
|-

|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqXAW2snGMI ''Capitalism'']
|Oingo Boingo
|There's nothing wrong with free enterprise.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/C68J1tJM6vU ''Unborn Child'']
|Seals and Crofts
|This pro-life song was a hit single in 1974, but for some reason gets left off the Seals and Crofts greatest hits albums.
|66
|-
|[http://youtu.be/bHpw6CzprNY ''Bad Rap (Who You Tryin' To Kid, Kid?)'']
|Steve Taylor
|Takes aim at LA and NY hipsters, the Village Voice, abortion, and "the left-wing band with their head in the sand".
|NA
|-
|''Last Kiss''
|Wayne Cochran and the C.C. Riders
|"Oh where oh where can my baby be; The Lord took her away from me; She's gone to heaven so I got to be good; So I can see my baby when."
|2 (J. Frank Wilson version)
|-
|''America USA''
|Joey Sudyka
|Not very well known, perhaps, but a good patriotic song.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6XZDb045xU ''Red White & Blue (Love It or Leave)'']
|[[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]
|
|27
|-SCHLAFLY IM HATE WHAT YOU REPRESENT, YOU NEED TO STAY MORE TRUE TO GODS BIBLE, AS A GOD FEARING MAN IM ASHAMED OF YOU!!!! BEGONE! LEAVE THIS WORLD FOUL DEMON! I BANISH YOU!!!!!! YOU ARE A SCOURGE UPON THIS EARTH AND SO IS YOUR MOTHER AND YOU"RE NOT EVEN THAT GOOD LOOKING! AND BESIDES, I READ ON ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE SITE THAT YOU'RE SECRETLY A COMMUNIST!!!!
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBohsCG8emk ''Simple Man'']
|[[Charlie Daniels]]
|A song about how drugs and poor politics are a result of people putting their bibles down. Also a strongly pro death penalty song.
|12
|-
|[http://youtu.be/p6q9nBusrq8 ''That Smell'']
|[[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]
|A very strong anti-drug use song by America's most well-known Southern rock band.
|NA
|-
|''Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue (The Angry American)''
|[[Toby Keith]]
|A patriotic response to the Sept. 11 attacks
|1 (Hot Country Songs)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pldyz9VS2yY ''Under God'']
|[[Pat Boone]]
|
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/iq10bz3PxyY ''Christmas Shoes'']
|NewSong
|A Christmas song by a Christian band.
|1 (Adult Contemporary)
|-
|[http://www.scoutsongs.com/lyrics/proudtobeamerican.html ''God Bless the USA'']
|Lee Greenwood
|
|7 (Hot Country)
|-
|''God Bless America''
|Irving Berlin
|
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kZ0pA9REyU ''No Opportunity Necessary, No Experience Needed'']
|Richie Havens (Covered by Yes)
|"...I know your cross is heavier With every step Every step But I know a man who'd walk miles for you..."
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCXiuqJ1E6g ''Supper's Ready'']
|[[Genesis (band)|Genesis]]
|''There's an angel standing in the sun, and he's crying with a loud voice, "This is the supper of the mighty one", Lord of Lords, King of Kings, Has returned to lead his children home, To take them to the new Jerusalem.''
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoaH0I9UwLI ''Your Love Is Extravagant'']
|Casting Crowns
|
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnnhYE1DhC4 ''What If His People Prayed'']
|Casting Crowns
|
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EBiei21-C8 ''King Without a Crown'']
|Matisyahu
|A Hasidic Jew raps about God as the source of happiness and salvation from the things of this world: "If you're drowning in the waters and you can't stay afloat ask Hashem for mercy and He'll throw you a rope."
|7 (Hot Modern Rock Tracks)
|-
|''Take Me Home, Country Roads''
|John Denver
|Celebrates Southern country landscape and traditions.
|2
|-
|[http://youtu.be/RCqxq6xqoXI ''Sin City'']
|The Flying Burrito Brothers
|Attacks modern decadence and predicts divine punishment for sin.
|NA
|-
|''I Saw The Light''
|Hank Williams
|Redemption of sin through faith.
|NA
|-
|''No Son of Mine''
|Genesis
|
|12
|-
|[http://youtu.be/v9BtLRWbkmA ''Don't Stop (Thinking About Tomorrow)'']
|Fleetwood Mac
|Used by Bill Clinton as his campaign theme song in 1992, but liberals often try to appeal to conservative themes for elections.
|3
|-
|[http://youtu.be/Ke-r2K0ymWc ''Lightning Crashes'']
|Live
|The joy and significance of childbirth.
|1
|-
|''Takin' Care of Business''
|Bachman-Turner Overdrive
|The work ethic and promoting self-employment.
|12
|-
|''Cat's In The Cradle''
|Harry Chapin
|The importance of traditional families and responsible fatherhood.
|1
|-
|[http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=6547 ''The Devil Went Down To Georgia'']
|[[Charlie Daniels]]
|A deeper message here, as Daniels explains.
|3
|-
|''The Big Money''
|Rush
|Pro-[[capitalism]]
|45
|-
|''Real American''
|Rick Derringer
|Patriotic anthem, known as [[Hulk Hogan]]'s pre-match song.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP5EfwBWgg0&feature=related ''Go Down Moses'']
|[[Louis Armstrong]]
|
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5zEP4kvfnc ''Walking Contradiction'']
|[[Green Day]]
|Though a vocal critic of the [[Bush Administration]], here [[Green Day]] mocks the often self-contradictory and inconsistent [[liberal]] ideologies, hence the term "walking contradiction".
|21
|-
|''God and Guns''
|[[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]
|A powerful new song that elaborates on the song title.
|NA
|-
|''Stayin' Alive''
|[[The Bee Gees]]
|Pro-people and pro-staying alive, and this: "we can try to understand/the [[New York Times]]' effect on man."
|1
|-
|''Sympathy for the Devil''
|The Rolling Stones
|Reminds humanity conservatives are perfect and evil is present in the world and needs to be fought.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVsZap7WBm8 ''All In'']
|Lifehouse
|Describes a relationship with God as being full of commitment and without reservations.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y5GDvN9_OE ''The Ballad of the Green Berets'']
|Sergeant Barry Sadler
|Pro-American and pro-military.
|1
|-
|''Iraq No Phobia''
|Pro-Pain
|It is a pro-American, pro-military heavy metal song about the first [[Gulf War]]: ''"Mohammed's no match for the great Uncle Sam."''
|NA
|-
|''Bus Stop''
|The Hollies
|Pro-[[chivalry]], pro-romance and pro-marriage: "Someday my name and hers are going to be the same."
|5
|-
|''Stranger in Blue Suede Shoes''
|Kevin Ayers
|Defends the right of businessmen to choose their customers: "we don't serve strangers in blue suede shoes".
|NA
|-
|''Union Sundown''
|Bob Dylan
|The title says it all.
|NA
|-
|''People Get Ready''
|Curtis Mayfield and the Impressions
|An all-time classic song about the glory of the [[Lord]].
|3
|-
|''Get a Job''
|The Silhouettes
|Self-explanatory; a rebuke to lazy [[liberals]] who want to sit around and wait for government handouts.
|1
|-
|''Pray''
|[[Justin Bieber]]
|A song about supporting your country.
|61
|-
|''Hypnotize''
|System of a Down
|SOAD is a rather left-ish band although this song is about liberals believing anything they see or hear in the media.
|1
|-
|''Gematria (The Killing Name)''
|Slipknot
|This song is about what the liberals of America, who can get ''very'' annoying sometimes.
|NA
|-
|''Don't Tread On Me''
|Metallica
|Name says it all!
|21
|-
|''Welcome to the Family''
|Avenged Sevenfold
|A song about death row, although not anti-death penalty.
|8
|-
|[http://youtu.be/fHvf20Y6eoM ''Turn, Turn, Turn'']
|The Byrds
|An almost word-for-word direct quotation from the [[Bible]], specifically [[Ecclesiastes]], with the addition of the refrain "Turn, Turn, Turn".
|1
|-
|''Critical Acclaim''
|Avenged Sevenfold
|Pro-America and pro-Military.
|NA
|-
|''The Star Spangled Banner''
|Francis Scott Key
|The American national anthem.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/pearl+jam/dissident_20106414.html ''Dissident'']
|Pearl Jam
|About a woman who engages in [[liberal values]] by being impregnated out of wedlock and having an abortion, but immediately regrets doing so.
|3
|-
|[http://www.justsomelyrics.com/767663/McCarthy-Keep-an-Open-Mind-or-Else-Lyrics ''Keep an Open Mind or Else'']
|McCarthy
|About the conservative value of keeping an [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|open mind]].
|NA
|-
|''Way Out Here''
|Josh Thompson
|"Our house is all protected by the good Lord and a Gun", and "We wont take a dime if we aint earned it, when it comes to weight, brother we pull our own". It is pro gun ownership, the Lord, and hard work. Also preaches the morals and ethics that are known from small towns.
|15 (US Country)
|-
|''D-I-V-O-R-C-E''
|[[Tammy Wynette]]
|This sad song was a huge hit in 1968.
|1
|-
|''Respect''
|Aretha Franklin
|This song is about respecting woman and their choices to be equal members in society.
|1
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cxwIWPJV0I ''A Better Tomorrow'']
|Wu-Tang Clan
|A rap song about staying away from liberal excess and illegal acts in order to be a positive influence for the next generation.
|NA
|-
|[http://youtu.be/5Jxnt-QY-j4 ''Game of Love'']
|Wayne Fontana and the Mindbenders
|"The purpose of a man is to love a woman, and the purpose of a woman is to love a man... It started long ago in the Garden of Eden when Adam said to Eve 'Baby, you're for me.'"
|1
|-
|''It's America''
|Rodney Atkins
|Celebrates the American spirit and all the good things about the United States.
|1 (US Country)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eebfMFzJHNs&ob=av2e ''Warning'']
|[[Green Day]]
|Though a vocal critic of the [[Bush Administration]] and clearly supportive of [[liberal values]], here they once again challenge liberal values with this song that mocks the liberal Nanny-state.
|3 (US Alternative)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHAFmFsb9XM&feature=related ''The Fightin' Side of Me'']
|Merle Haggard
|A song about patriotism and standing up for [[America]].
|1 (Hot Country Singles)
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA_H6C8iLPA ''Liberalism is a Mental Disorder'']
|The Infidel (Gregory Van Leer Jr.) with an opening from [[Michael Savage]]
|Clearly attacks [[liberal values]].
|NA
|-
|''The River''
|[[Bruce Springsteen]]
|Pre-marital sex and trade unionism punished by depression and redundancy.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.robertchristgau.com/get_artist.php?name=sex+pistols''Bodies'']
|The Sex Pistols
|Profane but graphically anti-abortion.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h1oRP7FfBw ''Sunny Afternoon'']
|The Kinks
|About a rich man trying to enjoy the simple things in life because the Nanny-state has nearly bankrupted him.
|14
|-
|''2+2=5 (The Lukewarm)''
|Radiohead
|A song chastising people for accepting the mainstream medias version of events and not paying attention.
|NA
|-
|''No Children''
|The Mountain Goats
|A song about a marriage falling apart because the couple has no children to hold the family together.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuUmLIPSasI ''God Loves My Country'']
|Balthrop, Alabama
|A song that declares that God loves America most of all.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J51LPlP-s9o ''Hallowed Be Thy Name'']
|Iron Maiden
|Quite possibly one of the most conservative metal songs ever: it's about death row but not anti-death penalty, the protagonist believes in the concepts of an afterlife and a soul, and the title and protagonist's final words are both based on the Lord's Prayer.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVOEoo1oXBs ''Declaration Day'']
|Iced Earth
|A song about the Revolutionary War.
|NA
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1IpcvdF6jc ''Boulevard of Broken Dreams'']
|Green Day
|Though critical of the Bush Administration, they clearly depict what a liberal life is like.
|2
|-
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zZE0SrkyNE&ob=av2n ''Where'd You Go'']
|Fort Minor
|Shows the hardship of divorce, liberal values, and the possible future of the families of our service men who could be forced to serve in Libya.
|2
|-
|''Patriotism''
|Company Flow
|While containing bad language it endorses the US as a super-power
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypkv0HeUvTc ''The Beautiful People'']
|Marilyn Manson
|Despite foul language, it endorses free thought and individuality while criticizing liberal hypocrisy and fascism.
|29
|-
|''Tribute''
|Tenacious D
|Comedy single, but it's also a very popular song about overcoming Satan and alludes to many other Christian themes such as heaven and hell.
|4
|-
|-
|''Country Trash''
|Johnny Cash
|In a comedic way, the song praises the small town conservative virtues of the people looked down upon by big city liberals as "Country trash"
|
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-pQBDE5Gbg ''Me Against The World'']
|Simple Plan
|As conservatives and Christians, [[liberal bias]] is all around us, in the media for example, trying to pressure us on a bandwagon to be like them and worship at the altar of liberalism and godlessness. It is up to us to stand up for what is right, even if we have to go up against the world.
|
|-
|''For Martha''
|The Smashing Pumpkins
|Being torn between the anguish of losing a lost one and the joy of knowing you will one day reunite them with in heaven
|
|-
|''Do You Hear the People Sing''
|Claude-Michel Schönberg
|Standing up to government in the name of freedom, from the musical ''Les Miserables''
|
|-
|[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIGzzeQjaE ''Dethharmonic'']
|Dethklok
|Anti-tax
|
|-
|''Mrs. Robinson''
|Simon & Garfunkel
|Explains how Jesus loves good Christians and how good Christians will go to Heaven if they pray
|1
|-
|}

Please add your best conservative picks.

== Debatable Whether Conservative ==

The top five in a poll of the greatest songs in the 20th century, according to the Recording Industry Association of America and the [[NEA]]:

*''Over the Rainbow'' (Judy Garland)
*''White Christmas'' (Bing Crosby)
*''Respect'' (Aretha Franklin)
*''American Pie'' (Don McLean)

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Essays]]
[[category:Music]]