Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

2011-11-13T14:28:11Z

SeanS: Undo revision 936598 by Pacman (talk)

'''Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome''' (usually referred to as '''AIDS''') is a collection of uncurable diseases and symptoms often believed to be caused by long-term infection with the[[HIV| Human Immunodeficiency Virus]]. In September of 2010, [[Reuters]] reported: "Nearly one in five gay and bisexual men in 21 major U.S. cities are infected with HIV, and nearly half of them do not know it".<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/23/us-aids-usa-idUSTRE68M3H220100923</ref> A September 2010 report of the [[Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) declared : "[[Homosexuality|Gay]], [[bisexual]], and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by [[HIV]] and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s. In 2006, MSM accounted for more than half (53%) of all new HIV infections in the United States..."<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm</ref> In August of 2009, LifeSiteNews reported: "An official with the [[Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) announced the CDC's estimate Monday that in the [[United States]] [[AIDS]] is fifty times more prevalent among men who have sex with men ('MSM') than the rest of the population."<ref>http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/aug/09082609</ref>

== Diagnosis ==

According to the CDC's 1993 guidelines, <ref>http://www.cdc.gov</ref><ref>http://www.merckmedicus.com/ppdocs/us/hcp/content/merck/hiv/hivaids/aidsdefi.htmAIDS is defined </ref>as follows:
HIV infection ''plus'' any of the following:
*[[CD4]] count less than 200 or
*CD4 percentage less than 14% of total lymphocytes or
*Any of the following illnesses: pulmonary TB, recurrent pneumonia, invasive cervical cancer.
*Expanded definition including 23 clinical conditions published elsewhere<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00018871.htm</ref>

The World Health Organization uses a different staging method for HIV disease. <ref>http://www.aids-ed.org/aetc/aetc?page=cm-105_disease</ref>

== History ==

''See also:'' [[Gay bowel syndrome]]

The illness was first recognized in the early 1980s<ref>New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 344:1764-1772 June 7, 2001 Number 23</ref> as homosexual men presented to their doctors with a rare lung disease called ''Pneumocystis carinii'' pneumonia (PCP)<ref>Pneumocystis pneumonia -- Los Angeles. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1981;30:250-252)</ref>. Early on, the "[[gay disease]]" took on a variety of names, including "gay cancer" and "Gay-related immune deficiency" (GRID). The [[Centers for Disease Control]] noticed an increase in requests for drugs needed to treat this illness and launched an epidemiological investigation.

Although the first cases of the disease probably go back to the 1950s, the epidemic was not recognized until the early 1980s.[http://www.avert.org/his81_86.htm] The early epidemic occurred in two main branches; in the US and other developed countries, and in sub-Saharan Africa. In the US, the early epidemic was primarily spread by homosexual sex, intravenous drug use, and blood transfusions (prior to the introduction of testing). In Africa, transmission was almost exclusively by heterosexual sex. Currently, most new infections worldwide are spread by promiscuous heterosexual sex and prostitution.

<blockquote>
"We owe it to Ryan to make sure that the fear and ignorance that chased him from his home and his school will be eliminated. We owe it to Ryan to open our hearts and our minds to those with AIDS. We owe it to Ryan to be compassionate, caring and tolerant toward those with AIDS, their families and friends. It's the disease that's frightening, not the people who have it."
—Former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, April 11, 1990 in regards to the case of Ryan White.
</blockquote>

== Natural History ==

After infection with [[HIV]], the virus quickly replicates in lymphatic tissue and travels through the blood to infect most areas of the body. The largest consequence of this is the "hijacking" of certain immune cells, especially so-called T-Helper, or CD-4, cells. Early in the infection, the immune system holds the infection at bay, often causing "Acute Retroviral Syndrome", a flu-like illness. Patients often have swollen lymph nodes. After approximately 8-10 years of infection, the immune system begins to lose its battle. This is primarily seen in the loss of numbers of CD4 cells, however the changes are somewhat more complex. When the CD4 cell level drops low enough, AIDS becomes apparent.
The first symptoms of the illness are generally night sweats, weight loss, and oral thrush.

== Opportunistic Infections (OIs) ==

The hallmark of AIDS is the appearance of ''opportunistic infections'', meaning infections with organisms that do not usually cause human disease, unless given the right "opportunity". This opportunity is the reduction in cell-mediated immunity, first seen in patients with certain cancers or on anti-rejection drugs for organ transplantation.
These infections include:

*[[Candida albicans]]. Caused by the candida fungi, resulting in thrush (mouth) and vaginal yeast infections. Most common HIV-related fungus infection.
* Cryptoccoccal Menigitis. A yeast-like fungus infection that usually involves the brain and lungs, although it can affect almost any organ. Most often occurs when a person's CD4+ T cell count falls below 100 cells per cubic millimeter of blood.
*Cryptococcus neoformans (a cause of meningitis).
*[[Cytomegalovirus]]. Virus can affect the entire body, but it commonly affects the eye's retina, causing blurry vision and in severe cases, blindness. Most likely to occur when a person’s CD4+ T cell count falls below 100.
*Epstein Barr virus (leads to a type of lymphoma).
*Human herpesvirus-8 (causes Kaposi's sarcoma). Results in reddish purple lesions that usually appear on the skin.
* Liver Disease. One of the leading causes of death among AIDS patients,
*Mycobacterium avium complex (atypical mycobacterium). Bacterial infection that can cause persistent fever, night sweats, fatigue, weight loss, anemia, abdominal pain, dizziness, diarrhea and weakness. Most likely occurs when the CD4+T cell count falls below 50.
*[[Mycobacterium tuberculosis]] (TB).
*Pneumocystis jiroveci, previously [[Pneumocystis carinii]]. Condition occurs when a fungus infects the lungs. Symptoms may include night sweats and fatigue, fever, cough, difficulty breathing, weight loss. Most likely to occur when the CD4+ T cell count falls below 200.
* Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy (PML) Rare disorder of the nervous system caused by a common human polyomavirus, JC virus. Can occur when the CD4+T cell count falls below 200.
* Recurrent Pneumonia. Most likely to occur when the CD4+ T cell count falls below 200
*Staphylococcus aureus (primarily causes skin infections).
*Streptococcus pneumoniae (the primary cause of pneumonia in AIDS patients).
*[[Toxoplasma gondii]]. Condition occurs when a parasite infects the brain. Symptoms include confusion or delusional behavior, severe headaches, fever, seizures and coma. Most likely occurs when the CD4+ T cell count falls below 100.<ref>[http://www.ucsfhealth.org/adult/medical_services/infect/hiv/infections.html Infections Associated with AIDS, UCSF Medical Center.</ref>

== Dissent ==
Among many medical professionals and biologists, there is general agreement that HIV causes AIDS. In this, those of Koch's postulates that apply to viral diseases have been clearly fulfilled, and basic science research has shown the same. Specific drugs have been developed that treat HIV infection and AIDS, helping show the causal relationship. That being said, there is a vocal minority of people, scientists and non-scientists alike, who do not believe that HIV causes AIDS. Foremost among these is Dr. Peter Duesberg. Details about these "re-thinkers" and their arguments can be found at several websites, <ref>Peter Duesberg on AIDS - Duesberg.com - HIV/AIDS research website for Peter H. Duesberg http://www.duesberg.com/</ref> but not in any reliable peer-reviewed journals.

== See also ==

* [[AIDS prevention]]
* [[Gay bowel syndrome]]
* [[Homosexuality]]
* [[Homosexuality and health]]
* [[Mortality]]

==External links==
*[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/robert-knight/2007/12/01/some-questions-media-wont-ask-today-about-aids Some Questions the Media Won't Ask Today About AIDS], Robert Knight, [[NewsBusters]], December 1, 2007
* [http://www.ucsfhealth.org/adult/medical_services/infect/hiv/infections.html Infections Associated with AIDS], University of California, San Francisco

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Diseases]]
[[Category:Syndromes]]
[[Category:Demography]]
[[Category:AIDS| ]]

User talk:SeanS

2011-11-10T02:55:06Z

SeanS: /* Block of Danielarmunrud */

<center>RETIRED </center>

== Relly retired ==

Are you really retired? It means you don't edit, you know. If you're not, you might consider removing the templates.--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 16:05, 29 October 2011 (EDT)
:I'm vaguely retired in that i dont plan to make any actual namespace edits at this point--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 16:11, 29 October 2011 (EDT)

== Kenneth Williams ==

Why is the death of Kenneth Williams attributed to Hollywood values? --[[User:Hetgar|Hetgar]] 17:49, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

== Block of Danielarmunrud ==

Why are you doing this? I mean, so what if he copied from WP. It's not like this place is WP or [http://www.ameriwiki.org/index.php?title=Main_Page Ameriwiki]; nobody cares as long as he doesn't promote ''Lieberull Valyoos.'' --[[User:SamTC|SamTC]] 21:44, 9 November 2011 (EST)
:Rules say no WP, and he choose articles that dont even meet they're requirements. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:46, 9 November 2011 (EST)
::Like I said, who cares? CP is just a hate blog these days, and as long as he's padding the edit count Schlafly's happy. --[[User:SamTC|SamTC]] 21:48, 9 November 2011 (EST)
:::I could ban you for that... but eh. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:51, 9 November 2011 (EST)
::::You could. Or you could do something constructive, like going back to AW and writing an astronomy article like I asked you to. --[[User:SamTC|SamTC]] 21:53, 9 November 2011 (EST)
:::::Now that is just stalking :P--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:55, 9 November 2011 (EST)

User talk:SeanS

2011-11-10T02:51:24Z

SeanS: /* Block of Danielarmunrud */

User talk:SeanS

2011-11-10T02:46:34Z

SeanS: /* Block of Danielarmunrud */

Denials that atheists exist

2011-11-10T02:21:27Z

SeanS: Undo revision 935372 by SamTC (talk) "ce of atheists is delivered by the brilliant political mind [[George H.W. Bush]" thats why

[[File:Cornelius Van Til.jpg|thumb|175px|right|Dr. Cornelius Van Til]]
It has been asserted by various theists that atheists do not exist. Sir [[Francis Bacon]] wrote in his essay ''Of [[Atheism]]'':
{{cquote|The [[Bible|Scripture]] saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it....It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man.<ref>http://www.bartleby.com/3/1/16.html</ref>}}

In addition, Christian [[philosophy|philosophers]] and [[Christian apologetics|apologists]] Dr. Cornelius Van Til and Dr. Greg Bahnsen argued there are no atheists and that atheists are actively suppressing their belief and knowledge of God and enigmatically engage in self-deception.<ref>http://www.cmfnow.com/articles/PA191.htm</ref> The [[England|English]] poet Edward Young wrote in his famous work ''Night Thoughts'' that "By night, an atheist half-believes a God."<ref>http://www.bartleby.com/100/224.html</ref>

The Christian Cyclopedia states regarding atheism the following:
{{cquote|It is not possible for a man to be an atheist, in the commonly accepted sense, in his innermost conviction. No amount of reasoning will erase from the human heart the God-given conviction that there is a Supreme Being; those who theoretically deny God's existence replace Him with something else.<ref>http://www.lcms.org/ca/www/cyclopedia/02/display.asp?t1=A&t2=t</ref>}}

A famous phrase, most often attributed to journalist Ernie Pyle, states, "there are no atheists in foxholes."<ref>Malin, Don. "Military Chaplains and Religious Pluralism." ''Watchman Fellowship''. http://www.wfial.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=artGeneral.article_6</ref> Although this aphorism has a narrow context (military personnel serving in active duty) and is not always meant to be taken literally, there is at least some truth to it. It shows that it is human nature to look to some higher power for assistance, strength, comfort, or guidance in times of great need.

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category:Theology]]

Sarah Palin

2011-11-10T02:20:50Z

SeanS: Undo revision 935328 by EternalTruth (talk)

{{Officeholder
|name=Sarah Palin
|image=Sarah Palin.jpg
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=[[Todd Palin]]
|religion=Christian
|offices=
{{Officeholder/governor
|number=11th
|state=Alaska
|terms=December 4, 2006 - July 26, 2009
|preceded=[[Frank Murkowski]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Sean Parnell]]
}}
{{Officeholder/mayor
|number=
|city=Wasilla, Alaska
|terms=1996–2002
|preceded=John Stein
|former=y
|succeeded=Diane Keller
}}
}}

'''Sarah Louise Heath Palin''' (pronounced pay'-lynn) (born February 11, 1964) is a [[conservative]] [[Republican Party|Republican]] who served as the 11th [[governor]] of [[Alaska]] from 2006 through 2009. She is both the first woman and the youngest person to hold this office in the state's history. On July 3, 2009 Palin announced that she would resign as governor of Alaska.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/03/AR2009070301738.html Sarah Palin to Resign as Alaska Governor, Citing Probes and Family Needs] Rucker, Philip and Eli Saslow, July 4, 2009, washingtonpost.com, retrieved August 20, 2011</ref> Executive power was transferred to [[Lieutenant Governor]] [[Sean Parnell]].

Palin came to the nation's attention as Senator [[John McCain]]'s vice presidential running mate in the [[2008 Presidential Election]].<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/palins_vp_selection_speech.html Acceptance Speech by Palin] realclearpolitics.com, August 29, 2008</ref> She is the first woman to appear on a Republican presidential ticket. In an appearance on August 30, 2008 in Washington, Pennsylvania, she was greeted by a surprisingly large crowd as she promoted the new McCain-Palin ticket. She brought a [[populism|populist]] image and a record of cutting wasteful spending and reforming government to McCain's ticket. In the summer of 2007, she was the most popular governor in America, having cut 13% of [[Alaska]]'s budget.<ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp The Most Popular Governor] Barnes, Fred, Jul 16, 2007, weeklystandard.com</ref>

She is strongly [[pro-life]], and a prominent spokesperson for [[special needs]] children. She favors more competition in health care, and pushed for abolishing the [[certificate of need]] regulations that interfere with opening new medical clinics.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090403253.html?referrer=emailarticle Palin's Efforts to Reform Health Care Are Complicated] Mosk, Matthew, September 5, 2008, washingtonpost.com</ref>

Her memoir ''[[Going Rogue]]'' was published in November 2009, with Palin drawing large crowds to book signings around the country. She comments regularly on public affairs via her [[Facebook]] page, having criticized the "death panels" of the health care reform program, and praised President Obama's pro-war speech upon his receiving the [[Nobel]] Peace prize in December 2009. She appears regularly on [[Fox News Channel]].<ref>[http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/sarah-palin-to-contribute-to-fox-news/?scp=2&sq=Palin&st=cse Sarah Palin to contribute to Fox News] Rutenberg, Jim, January 11, 2011, Media Decoder blog, nytimes.com</ref>

Since her rise to prominence in 2008, Palin has been the subject of demonization by the left-wing mainstream media, including insults to her intellect and various sexist comments.

==Personal Background==
[[Image:Sarah Palin Todd Trig.jpg|thumb|right|250px|In this April 23, 2008 file photo, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, left, and her husband, Todd Palin, hold their baby boy Trig in Anchorage, Alaska. 
''Photo courtesy of Newsmax.com'']]

Palin was born in Sandpoint, [[Idaho]]. Her family moved to Alaska in 1964, when her parents came to teach school in Skagway. Palin attended Wasilla High School where her extracurricular activities included captaining the basketball team which went on to win the state championship.<ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108935141721343.html?mod=googlenews_wsj Obama Can't Win Against Palin] Rove, Karl, The ''Wall Street Journal'', September 11, 2008</ref> She has lived in Skagway, Eagle River and Wasilla in Alaska.

After graduating in 1982, she went on to college, attending several institutions before earning a bachelor of science degree in communications-journalism from the [[University of Idaho]] in 1987. To earn money for college, Palin entered beauty pageants.

She worked in the media and the utility industry before beginning her career in public service in 1992.

Sarah married [[Todd Palin]], a part Yupik [[Eskimo]] and lifelong Alaskan, on August 29, 1988. Todd formerly worked at a non-management union job in the oil industry, and also as a commercial salmon fisherman. He is a four-time champion of the Iron Dog, the world's longest snowmobile race. Todd was a member of the United Steelworkers Union, and their eldest son Track served in [[Iraq]] while in the [[United States Army]]. The Palins have five children: Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper, and Trig.

Sarah Palin is a [[Labor union|union]] member, a [[moose]] hunter and holds a [[NRA]] Benefactor Life membership.<ref>[http://www.nrablog.com/post/2009/08/02/Phil-Schreier-reports-from-Alaska.aspx Phil Schreier reports from Alaska] Sturgis, Danielle, August 2, 2009, nrablog.com</ref> She stays active as a marathon runner, sports team mom, hockey manager and school volunteer. Palin enjoys hunting, fishing and Alaskan history.

Palin has been widely praised among conservatives for acting on her [[pro-life]] beliefs in the case of her youngest son, Trig, who was diagnosed with [[Down syndrome]] in the fourth month of her pregnancy. After researching the condition, she and her husband agreed to continue to pregnancy. "[My husband Todd said,] we shouldn't be asking 'Why us?' We should be saying 'Well, why not us?' We've both been very vocal about being pro life. We understand that every innocent life has wonderful potential. I'm looking at him right now, and I see perfection. Yeah, he has an extra chromosome. I keep thinking, in our world, what is normal and what is perfect?"<ref>[http://www.celebrity-babies.com/2008/05/gov-sarah-palin.html Gov. Sarah Palin discusses son Trig's Down syndrome diagnosis] ''People'' magazine, celebrity baby blog, May 3, 2008</ref><ref>[http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=29242 Canadian Doctors 'Fear' Sarah Palin's Choice May Start a Trend] Baklinski, Thaddeus M., September 11, 2008, Catholic Online</ref>

Trig was born on April 18, 2008, four months before his mother was announced as the vice-presidential candidate. Palin wrote:
:"This new person in your life can help everyone put things in perspective and bind us together, and get everyone focused on what really matters ... Those who love him will think less about self and focus less on what the world tells [us] is 'normal' or 'perfect.'"<ref>[http://motherjones.com/files/birth_of_trig.pdf Birth of Trig] original PDF, motherjones.com, retrieved August 20, 2011</ref>

:"It's a sign of the times to be able to do this," she said. "I can think of so many male candidates who watched a families grow while they were in office. There is no reason to believe a woman can't do it with a growing family. My baby will not be at all or in any sense neglected."<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-05-10-4082128881_x.htm Alaska governor balances newborn's needs, official duties] Quinn, Steve, May 5, 2008, ''USAToday''</ref>

In September of 2008, Palin announced that her daughter Bristol was five months pregnant.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/01/us-usa-politics-palin-idUSN2944356420080901 Palin rebuts rumors, says daughter pregnant] Holland, Steve, September 1, 2008, reuters.com, retrieved August 20, 2011</ref> After having been given the choice, Bristol bravely chose to keep the child. Palin stated "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents."<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502163_162-4404184-502163.html Palin's Daughter Pregnant] Ververs, Vaughn, September 1, 2008, cbsnews.com</ref> Bristol has since gone on to promote abstinence as a realistic choice for teenagers, stating, "[A]bstinence is the only way you can effectively, 100% foolproof way you can prevent pregnancy."<ref>[http://www.lifenews.com/nat5025.html Sarah Palin’s Husband Todd, Daughter Bristol Promote Abstinence For Teenagers] Ertelt, Steven, May 6, 2009, lifenews.com</ref>

==Early political career==
===City Councilwoman===
Palin served two two-year terms on the Wasilla City Council, being first elected in 1992 when she was 28 years old.

===Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska===
In 1996, Palin ran for mayor of Wasilla against 9-year incumbent John Stien in a non-partisan race. She won the race 58% to 42%.<ref name="mayor">[http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008163431_palin070.html Sarah Palin had turbulent first year as mayor of Alaska town] Armstrong, Ken and Hal Bernton, September 7, 2008, The ''Seattle Times'', retrieved on August 20, 2011.</ref> Her first months as mayor were rocky, and there was even talk of a recall, but things eventually smoothed out and she was re-elected in 1999. Palin said later of the experience, "I grew tremendously in my early months as mayor."<ref name="mayor"/>

During her time as mayor, Palin hired a Washington lobbying firm to help secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, otherwise known as earmarks.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-31-palin-bridge_N.htm Palin backed 'bridge to nowhere' in 2006] Dilanian, Ken, September 1, 2008, USAToday.com</ref> Ms. Palin's leadership qualities were recognized when she was elected as president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.

===Other political experience===

In 2002, she ran for Lieutenant Governor, but came in second in a four-way race. Later that year, when [[Frank Murkowski]] resigned his [[Senate]] seat to become [[governor]], she interviewed for the opening. Instead, Murkowski appointed his daughter [[Lisa Murkowski]] to the seat.

In 2003, Governor Mukowski appointed Palin to serve as Panel Ethics Commissioner of Alaska's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which regulates Alaska's non-renewable resources of [[oil]] and [[gasoline|gas]]. She resigned in 2004 as a protest over the "lack of ethics" of fellow panelists who had ignored her complaints of legal violations and conflicts of interest. Palin took a great political risk by revealing that Randy Reudrich, chairman of the state Republican Party, was doing political business on state time, fulfilling a [[conflict of interest]] statement that required her to report such things. This action endeared her to the people of Alaska.

To help cultivate influence and political clout in the state, Palin served from 2003 until June 2005 as one of three directors of the Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc., a 527 group that raised funds from corporate donors.<ref>[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/palin_was_a_director_of_embatt.html#more Palin Was a Director of Embattled Sen. Ted Stevens's 527 Group] Mosk, Matthew, September 1, 2008, The Trail Blog, washingtonpost.com</ref> The stated purpose of the group is, "To increase the number of Republican women in elected offices and in appointed governmental and political positions, including advisory and regulatory commissions through training and education."<ref>[http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/527/ted_stevens_excellence_in_public_service_inc.asp Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc.] CampaignMoney.com</ref>

She has also served on the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. She was named one of Alaska's "Top 40 Under 40", Alaska's Public Works "Person of the Year", and was inducted into the Sigma Beta Delta Honor Society at Alaska Pacific University. Palin has served on numerous boards and commissions throughout the state.

==Governor of Alaska==

Palin ran for governor in 2006 on a clean government platform, and accomplished a political rarity in defeating the incumbent Governor [[Frank Murkowski]] in the Republican primary. Palin went on to defeat former Governor [[Tony Knowles]] in the general election. Some of the highlights of her governorship include: cutting expenses of Alaska's government, freezing government hiring, reducing earmarks by 86%, and championing the private sector.

===Energy and Oil===

Palin spoke a great deal about harnessing [[oil]] and natural [[gas]] resources, and in March 2007, presented the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA), a bill promoting the construction of a gas pipeline.<ref>[http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/0001000.shtml Governor gets AGIA] Nelson, Kristen, week of May 20, 2007, petroleumnews.com, retrieved August 20, 2011</ref> The bill received bipartisan support, and was signed into law by Governor Palin in June. In August of 2008 she signed legislation giving state authority to award TransCanada Corp a license to build and operate a multibillion-dollar pipeline to ship natural gas from the North Slope.<ref>[http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=2e84b1e8-9a4a-4558-ad05-21b517c50fae Alaska governor signs natgas pipeline license bill] Reuters, August 28, 2008, canada.com</ref> Intended to improve Alaska's economy, it instead became a vehicle to pay $37 million to Transcanada, with potential liabilities for the state of up to half a billion dollars.<ref>[http://www.adn.com/2011/01/20/1659129/lawmakers-express-frustration.html Lawmakers express frustration over gas pipeline subsidies] Cockerham, Sam, January 21, 2011, adn.com</ref> The pipeline will not be profitable for 20 years based on natural gas forecasts.<ref>[http://www.adn.com/2010/12/22/1616472/report-leaves-pipeline-out-of.html Gas pipeline to be pushed back, federal agency predicts] Bohner, Becky, December 23rd, 2010, adn.com</ref> As of February 2011, Alaska's lawmakers were looking for exit strategies from the plan.<ref>[http://www.adn.com/2011/02/04/1684449/alaska-lawmakers-propose-ditching.html Alaska lawmakers propose ditching Palin gas line program] Bohner, Becky, February 4, 2011, adn.com</ref>

As governor, Palin created a new subcabinet that develops policies to reduce greenhouse gases and help the state adapt to [[climate change]]. She supports oil production in ANWR, connecting it with national security.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GE11URmmnc Youtube.com interview with Palin posted August 28, 2008]</ref>

Alaska was not significantly affected by the 2007 [[housing bubble]] crash, however, the dollar did soften, which raised the price of oil in the global market without raising the costs of production. This led to windfall profits for Alaska. Despite oil companies' objections, Palin worked with the [[Democrats]] in the Alaska state legislature to approve a major increase in taxes on the oil industry.<ref>[http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008103325_alaskatax07.html Windfall tax lets Alaska rake in billions from Big Oil] Gonzalez, Angel and Hal Bernton, August 10, 2008, The ''Seattle Times''</ref> This bill, known as "Alaska's Clear and Equitable Share" (ACES), was lampooned by the conservative talk radio media as Alaskans Clearly Entering Socialism.<ref>Rick Rydell Radio Program, 650KENI.com, 2/8/2011, 8:43 AM Alaska Standard Time</ref>.) The state sent Alaskans a $1200 check to help pay for increased gas prices, using the increased revenues from the tax.<ref>[http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/11/palin-backed-alaskan-windfall-profits-tax/ Palin backed Alaskan windfalls-profit tax]</ref> Palin's successor, Governor Sean Parnell, and Republican Alaska legislatures have criticized ACES, stating the taxes have prevented further oil and gas development in the state.<ref>[http://www.adn.com/2011/06/04/v-printer/1899655/palin-flaunts-alaska-alaskans.html Palin flaunts Alaska; Alaskans unsure about her] Cockerham, Sean, June 4, 2011, adn.com, retrieved August 20, 2011</ref>

Palin also announced on May 21, 2008 that the state would challenge a recent listing of [[polar bears]] as a threatened species as she and other Alaska elected officials feared such a listing would cripple oil and gas development in prime polar bear habitat off the state's northern and northwestern coasts. Palin's belief is that there is not enough evidence to support a listing, asserting that polar bears are well-managed and their population has dramatically increased over 30 years as a result of conservation.

As governor of Alaska in Jan. 2009, Palin announced support for [[Alternative energy]] programs as she proposed a statewide energy plan that called for 50% of Alaska's power to be generated by renewable resources by 2025.<ref> Dan Joling, "Palin unveils state energy goals," [http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/657216.html ''Anchorage Daily News'' Jan. 16, 2009]</ref>

Palin has pointed out how environmentalists are responsible for locking up safer drilling areas on dry land, effectively forcing offshore drilling to become the preferred mode of acquiring oil, and inviting crises like the [[Gulf of Mexico oil spill]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nysun.com/editorials/sarah-palins-way-of-thinking/86988/|work=[[The New York Sun]]|format=HTML|title=Sarah Palin’s Way of Thinking|date=June 5th 2010|language=English|quote=Governor Palin’s point will, we predict, become only more logical in the face of the disaster of the Deepwater Horizon. And she will increasingly come to be seen as having a clear way of thinking. She thinks like an economist. She understands that policies have consequences. If one wants, as the environmentalists have been doing for a decade, to restrict onshore drilling, it is going to incent offshore drilling.}}</ref>

===State Economy===
[[Image:Govp_2008stos_large.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Gov. Sarah Palin delivering her 2008 State of the State address]] At first, Palin supported the Gravina Island Bridge Project, otherwise known as the "Bridge to Nowhere". In September 2006, during a stop in [[Ketchikan]] as part of her gubernatorial campaign, Palin stated, "OK, you've got Valley trash standing here in the middle of nowhere," Palin said, according to an account in the Ketchikan Daily News. "I think we're going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project."<ref>[http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html Palin touts stance on 'Bridge to Nowhere']</ref> The $398 million bridge would have connected Ketchikan, on Revillagigedo Island in southern southeast Alaska, to its airport on nearby Gravina island. The Anchorage Daily News also quoted her in an October, 2006 article as saying yes, she would continue state funding for the bridge because she wanted swift action on infrastructure projects. "The window is now while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist," she said.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_bridge_to_nowhere;_ylt=Am.NkRx1mLWk9A34FLhn8IADW7oF Critics: Palin used 'Bridge to Nowhere' for gain]</ref> Palin announced her opposition to the project in a 2007 press release.

She has stated her opposition arose because of the excessive amount of pork-barrel spending in the project, and that she would not fund the $329 million that was short for the budget.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/22/alaska.bridge.ap/</ref> This reversal cost her the support of prominent Alaskan Republicans like Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, who said, "You don't tell a group of Alaskans you support something and then go to someplace else and say you oppose it". Palin instead said that the best option would be to upgrade the ferry system. However, the money that was retained from the earmark was not used for the ferry system, but was spent building a road on Gravina Island that links to the site of the canceled bridge.<ref name="bridge">http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN3125537020080901 Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans</ref>

Prominent Alaskan politicians criticized Palin for not "giving back" money earmarked for the project. These critics included her Republican campaign coordinator in Ketchikan, who stated that "She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money".<ref name="bridge" /> However, state governments do not "give back" money in the manner proposed.

Three times during Palin's time as mayor, earmark funding for projects in Wasilla were noted in [[John McCain]]'s list of "objectionable" spending in 2001 and 2002. McCain's list of spending approved without normal budget scrutiny identified a $500,000 earmark for a public transportation project in the city and a $1 million earmark for an emergency communications center while $450,000 was set aside for an agricultural processing facility.<ref>[http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,6145252.story McCain had criticized earmarks from Palin]</ref> Palin, of course, as mayor of a small town had no ability to put these items in a Congressional bill, but her town did benefit from earmarked spending given to Alaska.

=== Foreign Policy ===
[[Image:Ftwainwright_govp_05s.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Governor Sarah Palin visits Strykers at Fort Wainwright, where she is briefed on how the troops are trained and what the training grounds provide.]]
Palin served as Commander in Chief of the Alaska Army [[National Guard]]. In 2007 she visited troops in [[Germany]] and [[Kuwait]]. According to Major General Craig E. Campbell, the adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard who commands the roughly 3,800 state militia members, the Alaskan governor is not in the site's chain of command and has no authority over its operations. He told the Associated Press on August 31st that he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. He went on to state that the entire operation is under federal control.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/31/ap/politics/main4401854.shtml GOP Cites Palin's Skill, But How Relevant Is It?]</ref>

During her first major interview, with ABC's [[Charlie Gibson]], Gibson asked Palin if she agreed with the "[[Bush Doctrine]]". Palin responded, "In what respect, Charlie?" Gibson followed, "What do you interpret it to be?" Palin answered with another question, "His world view?" Gibson still refused to answer directly but instead stated it was the doctrine Bush had proposed in September of 2002, before the Iraq war. Palin gave a response concerning Bush's attempt to eradicate Islamic extremism. Gibson then explained that the Bush doctrine refers to the right of anticipatory defense, a right to a [[Preemptive war|preemptive]] strike against any country that we think is going to attack us. What Gibson did not point out is that he himself once gave a definition of the "Bush doctrine" (a concept made up by the press that has no clear definition) that was similar to Palin's answer. Indeed it has been pointed out since that there are actually four different versions of what the Bush doctrine is and the term and meaning changes over time and place.<ref>http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/12/palins-definition-of-bush-doctrine-hits-the-gibson-mark/</ref>

===Legislature Investigation===
On July 11th Palin's chief of Staff fired Commissioner of Public Safety Walt Monegan, she was heavily criticized for the action on the 12th in the state newspapers and on the 14th in the conservative talk radio media <ref>Rick Rydell, Mike Porcaro, and Eddy Burke, as well as Shannyn Moore the liberal</ref>, and on the Blog of prominent Alaskan Republican Andrew Halcro on the 17th, because Walt Monegan was a very popular administrator. The outrage was 1.5 months before she was announced for VP. On the 11th of August of 2008, the [[Alaska]] state legislature began an investigation of Palin and her staff for potential abuse of power in regards to a firing of Monegan, The vote to begin this action was held on July 28th, two weeks and two days after the firing. Legally, Palin could dismiss Monegan at any time as he serves at the pleasure of the governor. Monegan was dismissed from his position in July of 2008, which Palin's political opponents claim was due to Monegan's refusal to fire trooper Mike Wooten, Palin's former brother-in-law who had a history of complaints including tasering his 10 year old stepson.<ref name="pc">http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212168861.shtml</ref> Palin says she released Monegan due to differences on budgeting. In an interview Monegan said that he was never told specifically by Sarah Palin to fire the state trooper Mike Wooten.<ref name="pc" />

Palin has denied the charges and, as is customary, the State of Alaska has hired a lawyer to represent her office in the investigation. August 25th, the Legislative Council voted 12-0 to hire Democratic state senator Hollis French as the investigator.<ref>[http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=59d_1220063478 Investigation into Governor Sarah Palin's abuse of powers] CBS 11, August 30, 2008</ref> The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 3-2 and the House Judiciary Committee voted 7-0. The State's attorney released this statement:<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cvn_palin_troopergate Palin hires attorney for Troopergate investigation]</ref>

:The governor of every state gets legal counsel and this attorney is part of a weeks-old effort to provide this governor defense in a series of outlandish politically motivated charges. This legal defense is neither new nor uncommon nor at all political. It is a matter of her job and is not recent and it is not related to her selection on the McCain-Palin ticket.

The McCain campaign came out with a picture that includes three lead state Democratic legislators investigating the Branchflower probe, known as ‘Troopergate'. The photo shows the three of them at [[Obama]] headquarters in Anchorage, Alaska in July. The photo did not include any of the Republicans also calling for investigation. The McCain campaign said the whole investigation is politically tainted and compromised. Republican Rep. John Coghill of North Pole called on managing investigator, legislator French to step down from the probe, saying he no longer had confidence in his objectivity. "These statements cause me to think that the report is already written even though the investigation is only just begun and the most important witnesses have not even been interviewed,” Coghill wrote in a letter calling for French’s replacement. “The investigation appears to be lacking in fairness, neutrality and due process.”<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2078644/posts McCain Camp has pictures of "troopergate" investigators at Obama Headquarters] FreeRepublic.com, September 9, 2008</ref> Democratic State Senator Kim Elton, head of the legislative council overseeing the investigation, said the decisions made by Sen. Hollis French "have been appropriate, bipartisan ... and unchallenged" and that French has called the comments he made last week "regrettable".<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/08/palin.investigation/ Head of Palin trooper probe will stay, lawmaker says]</ref> Lawyer Thomas Van Flein called the investigation "unlawful and unconstitutional" and said the man hired to run it, former prosecutor Stephen Branchflower, has a conflict of interest because he is a friend of the fired commissioner.<ref>[http://www.adn.com/troopergate/story/522488.html Palin's attorney calls investigator biased] Ap, September 11, 2008</ref>

The investigation issued its report for the Alaska State Legislative Council on October 10, 2008, concluding that Monegan's refusal to fire the trooper was not the sole reason he was dismissed, but was likely a contributing factor. The author of the report, Stephen Branchflower, focused on two questions of the inquiry: did Palin fire Walt Monegan improperly, and was the firing solely because of his refusal to fire her ex brother-in-law. "Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired," Branchflower wrote.<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4998X420081011</ref> Based on this, Branchflower claims that "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/DOWNLOAD.pdf Page 8</ref>

In accordance with the second question the report focused on, Branchflower wrote, "I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety," Branchflower wrote. The second finding of the report reads: "In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads." Branchflower also dismissed the Palins' assertions that they were afraid of Wooten because of threats they said he made. "Such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palins' real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family related reasons," he wrote.<ref>http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10692757?source=most_viewed</ref>

A preemptive response to this report was issued by the McCain/Palin campaign on October 9th, in which the campaign's own investigation concluded that Palin "acted within her proper and lawful authority in the reassignment of Walt Monegan".<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4998X420081011</ref>

In the end the "October Surprise" predicted by the head of the commission came to pass. Although the commission was asked not to release its findings until after the election to avoid political posturing, they refused to do so. Apart from tarring and feathering Palin, the report made no recommendations for any further inquiries or punishment, as it was understood that there was no case to do so. No direct reports of Sarah Palin abusing her power were ever produced or asking for the official to be fired were ever produced, but that didn't stop the report from drawing its conclusions based upon conjecture without evidence. Indeed, after the hoopla over the report subsided, the state personnel board released its finding that exonerated her of any wrongdoing.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_el_pr/palin_troopergate</ref>

===Resignation===
In July of 2009, Governor Palin held a national press conference to announce that she would resign her office effective July 26, 2009. She explained:
{{Cquote|My choice is to take a stand and effect change – not hit our heads against the wall and watch valuable state time and money, millions of your dollars, go down the drain in this new environment. Rather, we know we can effect positive change outside government at this moment in time, on another scale, and actually make a difference for our priorities – and so we will, for Alaskans and for Americans.<ref>[http://www.gov.state.ak.us/exec-column.php Executive Column: Palin's resignation announcement]</ref>}}

That decision was based on the Democrat strategy of filing frivolous court grievances against the governor, more than 13 since November 2008, costing Alaska taxpayers over $1 million. She would be triumphant in all those legal battles not losing once. The [[liberal]] criticism strategy shifted to call her a quitter over her decision not to complete her term of office and for pursuing media and financial opportunities.

==Vice Presidential Candidate==
[[Image:Palin Family..jpg|thumb|right|Palin family members at the announcement of Palin's vice presidential selection, August 29, 2008. From left: Todd, Piper, Willow, Bristol, and Trig.]]
On August 29, 2008, Republican John McCain announced the selection of Sarah Palin for his vice presidential running mate.<ref>http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/sarah_palin_vp/2008/08/29/126138.html</ref> The selection was a surprise, as those in the media were expecting [[Minnesota]] Governor [[Tim Pawlenty]] or former [[Massachusetts]]'s Governor [[Mitt Romney]]. Palin added youth and executive experience to the ticket. She is the first female vice presidential candidate on a Republican ticket, and only the second one from a major political party in U.S. history. [[Democrat]] [[Geraldine Ferraro]] was the first, as [[Walter Mondale]]'s running mate in 1984.

Palin's speech before the Republican convention on Wednesday, September 3rd was watched by over 40 million people. As many people watched her as watched Obama's acceptance speech on the final day of the Democratic convention.
===Democrat Responses===
In a possible problem for the Democratic ticket, a majority of people believed that the press was trying to hurt Palin<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/story/rasmussen/20080904/pl_rasmussen/palinmedia20080904;_ylt=AqErk__wZIKdoVvqUXdr44Nh24cA</ref> and that type of unwarranted attack could have backfired into more support for the McCain/Palin ticket especially with unaffiliated voters believing the press is purposely attacking Palin by a 49% to 32% margin.

Many Democrats had advised the Obama campaign to ignore Palin, fearing that emphasis on her inexperience will backfire against Obama himself.<ref>[http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2008/09/05/tips-for-obama-ignore-palin-dis-mccain Matt Coopoer, "Tips for Obama: Ignore Palin, Dis McCain," Sept. 5, 2008, ''Conde-Nast Portfoloio.com'']</ref> She participated in a debate with the Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden on October 2, 2008, ending up being declared the winner by most credible news sources that are not influenced by liberal bias. Palin "kept Joe Biden on the defensive" and "ended up dominating [the debate]".<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14234.html</ref>

During a campaign event in [[Virginia]], Barack Obama said of the McCain/Palin ticket's similar policies, "...You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig."<ref>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94481288</ref> Given the fact that she's stated "The difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull (is) lipstick" and the fact that only a female candidate would wear lipstick, the McCain camp released a web ad implying that the comment was targeting Governor Palin. The ad featured video clips of Gov. Palin convention speech, Obama's remarks at the campaign event, and a clip of Katie Couric commenting on pervasive sexism in the campaign. After extensive discussion in the news media, the ad was removed from McCain's website and other video sites following a copyright claim by CBS news.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/CBS_takes_down_McCain_webad_suggests_its_misleading.html?showall]</ref>

In what prosecutors described as an attempt to derail the campaign, Palin's private email account was hacked by a liberal activist and son of a Democratic lawmaker who was charged with four felonies carrying a maximum of 50 years for criminal privacy rights violations.<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/18/palin_email_investigation_continues/</ref> The offender, a self described Obama supporter, was convicted and sentenced to one year.

Palin is a lightning rod to the established [[liberal]] women's movement. She, like many high profile conservative females, has taken much abuse from the left. Palin has been forced to set up a legal defense fund to help pay for fees related to an onslaught of ethic complaints, which are always frivolous.<ref>[http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/18738 Palin blasts Obama administration: Government wants to "control the people"] CNN</ref> Because she is retiring from being governor of Alaska, the anti-American liberals pat themselves on the back in glee. Liberals still fail to understand that she is ''the'' typical conservative that the majority of Americans identify with. Her principles and her outlook on Americanism is a model for all future leaders.

Palin said of the people who have filed the complaints:
{{cquote| '''Those are the folks who want to tell me, they want to tell you, to sit down and shut up. We will not do that. I just can't, because I love my state. I love my country.''' }}

===Impact on Ticket===

In the run-up to the Vice-Presidential debate on October 2, 2008, a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center attempted to measure the degree to which Palin impacted the GOP ticket positively or negatively in September.<ref>http://people-press.org/report/456/obama-regains-lead</ref> The survey compared the answers to two identical questions about her qualifications and overall favorable/unfavorable rating between polls taken in early and late September. The results show that public opinion of Palin has fallen significantly since the Republican convention, particularly in the public's opinion of her qualification to be Vice President. Faced with a barrage of negative press attacks after her nomination, some prominent Republicans like [[Mitt Romney]] believe that the isolation of Palin from the media in September was a mistake, and are calling for an increase in unscripted encounters with the press and public to counter that perception. According to Romney, "Holding Sarah Palin to just three interviews and microscopically focusing on each interview I think has been a mistake. I think they’d be a lot wiser to let Sarah Palin be Sarah Palin. Let her talk to the media, let her talk to people."<ref>http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/09/30/doubts-about-palin-grow-even-among-conservatives/</ref> Exit polling from the election itself had the final say on the matter of her impact on the ticket. For those who considered her nomination on the ticket to be unimportant, 57% voted for Obama. For those who considered her nomination to be important, 53% voted for Obama, thereby showing a positive overall impact on the ticket. Considering that exit polling tilts Democratic, the actual impact may have been greater.

When asked during an interview with liberal media pundit Katie Couric what newspapers and magazines Palin read (a classic [[Liberal trap]]), Palin fumbled and was unable to name any particular news source because of the side-swipe. This added fuel to charges that she was not qualified to run for Vice President, when in fact she was clearly qualified by her service as governor. Palin charges back at Couric and other liberal media attacks in her book [[Going Rogue]].

==Palin in 2012==
Palin has the support of a large, enthusiastic base on the right that is ready to work for her in Republican primaries. She has been coy about announcing plans for 2012, but she is well positioned for a presidential run. Given her personal charisma, dedication to American values, and Reagan-esque connection with average, conservative Americans, she may be able to pull off a resounding victory.<ref>[http://www.capitalcityweekly.com/stories/120308/new_363163237.shtml Sarah Palin hits Republican talking points while stumping in Georgia]</ref>

===Relaunching of Media Attacks===

Palin's is under global attack from left wing media. In June 2011 Palin expressed a desire to meet with Margaret Thatcher, one of Ronald Reagan's staunchest international allies. There was a false report by the UK Guardian Newspaper that a Thatcher aid had belittled Palin calling her nuts: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2011/jun/07/margaretthatcher-sarahpalin]. However this was later proven to be false, as Margaret Thatcher's staff denied that any such words came from her office.<ref>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100092054/margaret-thatcher-did-not-‘snub’-sarah-palin-the-truth-about-the-iron-lady-and-the-former-governor-of-alaska/</ref>

A former Thatcher Aid who checked with her office confirmed

'''''"There was never any snub of Sarah Palin by Lady Thatcher’s office. However, there has been a great deal of mischief-making and unpleasantness from sections of the liberal press in a vain and futile attempt to use Margaret Thatcher’s name to smear a major US politician."'''''

The Guardian has a dedicated section to Sarah Palin, and participated with staff going to Alaska for the release of her emails and the enlisting of its readership to try and find any dirt. The Guardian starts most articles with simple errors such as "Ex Governor of the state with the smallest population ", a basic check would show that there are a number of states with smaller populations than Alaska including Vermont the source of 2 presidents. This is a small sample of the false information in all Guardian articles on Sarah Palin.

==SarahPAC==

On January 27, 2009 Palin formed the political action committee (PAC) SarahPAC. The organization supports "energy independence and reform" and will endorse candidates who "share Governor Palin’s ideas and goals."<ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=azCCxotgdG1E&refer=home</ref>

==Beliefs==
[[Image:Palin.JPG|right|150px]]
Palin believes in [[Real America]] and has referred to it often in her speeches.

Palin filled out a policy questionnaire for the Eagle Forum Alaska during her 2006 gubernatorial race. One question asked, "Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?" Palin responded, "Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support." Yet [[public schools]] still resist teaching abstinence and instead promote sexual behavior by teenagers.

Another question asked, "Are you offended by the phrase 'Under God' in the [[Pledge of Allegiance]]? Why or why not?" Palin replied, "Not on your life. '''If it was good enough for the Founding Fathers''', it's good enough for me and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."

Many liberals ignorant of the history of "under God" have tried to ridicule Palin's remark, even calling her an "idiot" for it.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/sep/01/week</ref><ref>The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, and George Washington's phrase "under God" was added to it in June 1954.</ref> In fact, the origin of the phrase "under God" is the General Orders of [[George Washington]] on July 2 and 9, 1776: "The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army" (July 2); "the peace and safety of the Country now depends, under God, solely on the success of our arms" (July 9).<ref>http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/264xqezm.asp?pg=2</ref> George Washington was indeed a [[Founding Father]], and the Founding Fathers made no secret of their Christian faith and unfailing belief in God in the [[Declaration of Independence]] and later writings.

Palin also believes that students need to learn of the controversy surrounding the [[Theory of evolution|Theory of evolution]], and that discussing Creationism should not be banned from schools. During the 2006 campaign for the Alaskan Governorship, Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."<ref>http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html</ref> She later clarified her position by stating "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum. As of September 2008 she has kept that pledge.

In an example of liberal mockery, the [[Huffington Post]] attempted to make light of Sarah Palin's creationist beliefs, highlighting the creationism belief that [[dinosaur|dinosaurs]] and man coexisted.<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/28/palin-claimed-dinosaurs-a_n_130012.html</ref> [[Saturday Night Live]] likewise did a skit in which they had her refer to the Museum of Natural History as "that evolution museum".

==Church Life==

Sarah Palin was baptized as a [[Roman Catholic]] and, at age 12, she was rebaptized in the Wasilla Assembly of God church.<ref>{{cite web
|accessdate=2008-08-30
|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-mccainveepbio30-2008aug30,0,2159346.story
|title=Palin has risen quickly from PTA to VP pick
|author=Decker, Cathleen and Michael Finnegan,
|work=Los Angeles Times
|date=August 30, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
| last = Gorsk| first = Eric
| url = http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g4-w_DCWffagBaQb8Il9a0R2hkPAD92SL7E00
| title = Evangelicals energized by McCain-Palin ticket
| publisher =Associated Press
| date = 2008-08-30
| accessdate = 2008-08-30}}</ref>

Palin attends the Wasilla Bible Church<ref>{{cite web |first=David |last=Pepper |title=Regarding Governor Palin: A Letter from Pastor David Pepper |url=http://churchontherockak.org/Regarding-Sarah-Palin.html |publisher=Church on the Rock |accessdate=2008-09-04}}</ref>, an independent congregation,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wasillabible.org/faq.htm |title=Wasilla Bible Church FAQ |accessdate=2008-09-05 |work= |publisher= |date= }}</ref><ref name="miller">Lisa Miller and Amanda Coyne. "[http://www.newsweek.com/id/156679 A Visit to Palin's Church: Scripture and discretion on the program in Wasilla]." ''Newsweek''. Sept. 2, 2008.</ref> when at home and attended the Juneau Christian Center when in Juneau as governor.<ref>{{cite web |title=Statement Concerning Sarah Palin |url=http://www.jccalaska.com/images/10000/3000/582JU/user/palin.htm |publisher=Juneau Christian Center |date=2008-09-03 |accessdate=2008-09-04}}</ref>

In December of 2008, Palin's church was severely damaged by arson. Damage to the Wasilla Bible Church was estimated at $1 million, authorities said. No one was injured in the fire, which was set Friday night while a handful of people, including two children, were inside. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/13/AR2008121302503.html Palin's Church Severely Damaged by Arson, WaPo, December 14, 2008]</ref> It is widely believed that leftist Palin-haters were responsible.

==Popularity==
Palin earned the highest TV ratings at the Republican convention when she spoke, even surpassing McCain's acceptance speech, and nearly matched Obama's acceptance speech<ref>http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/palin-triggers-rnc-ratings-spike/</ref>, gaining unprecedented attention. Likewise her Vice Presidential debate with [[Joe Biden]] had more viewers than any of the three debates between McCain and Obama.<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14201.html</ref> Also, her brief appearance on Saturday Night Live in October 2008 gave the show its highest ratings in 14 years, and was actually the third highest ranked show for the week based on the number of people who tuned in originally to watch her, 17 million, even though it ran at midnight in the East Coast Market.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/oct/20/ustelevision-tvratings</ref>
'''Sarah Palin's Alaska''' her reality show on The Learning Channel (TLC) drew about 2.5 million viewers on premier Sunday night, dominating its time slot<ref>http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/12/25/sunday-1219-cable-ratings-sarah-palins-alaska-top-gear-ax-men-leverage-kendra-real-housewives-more/76555</ref> and breaking TLC records with 5 million viewers having tuned in to watch the first episode.<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/15/sarah-palins-alaska-ratings-tlc_n_783740.html</ref>

==Media Disdain==
Since day one of her nomination as vice president, the [[mainstream media | liberal media]] has sought to demonize Palin. <ref>[http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/07/23/crucify-her-crucify-her-journalists-targeted-sarah-palin-in-non-official-campaign/ Crucify Her! Crucify Her! Journalists Targeted Sarah Palin in Non-Official campaign, Newsrealblog, July 23, 2010]</ref> Former CBS anchor Katie Couric won a journalism award for her involvement in embarrassing Palin with questions related to sources she reads. This is the same media that passes on Obama's gaffes such as Obama's uncle liberated Auschwitz, a tornado in [[Kansas]] killed 10,000 people, his visit to the 57 states of America. Not much has changed in 3-years since becoming the VP nominee. Palin toured the country by bus and [[liberal]]s became infuriated while trying to cover her every move. They went as far as accusing her of causing a "rolling menace" in traffic. <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2011/06/05/politico-warns-palin-bus-tour-rolling-menace-traffic Politico Warns Palin Bus Tour Is a 'Rolling Menace' in Traffic, Newsbusters.org, June 5, 2011]</ref> Mainstream journalists have been repeating the lie by calling former Alaska governor Sarah Palin an idiot. Ailes marveled at the frenzy surrounding her tour of historic sites: “She’s so smart she’s got the press corps running up the whole East Coast behind her bus.”

==''The Undefeated'' movie==
A nearly two-hour long film titled ''The Undefeated'' portrays Palin's time as Alaska's governor was released in July 2011. Conservative filmmaker Stephen K. Bannon created the film. Palin had no editorial role in the film. She reportedly saw a rough cut of the film and was blown away.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/164781-palin-on-the-big-screen Palin on the big screen, The Hill, June 5, 2011]</ref>

==Publications==
[[File:Palin Book2.jpg|right|125px]]
* '''''[[Going Rogue: An American Life]]''''', [[Memoir]], published by Harper-Collins:(November 2009) <ref>[http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2009/10/01/amazing-palin%E2%80%99s-book-number-one-on-both-amazon-and-barnes-unprecedented/ Amazing: Palin’s book number one on both Amazon and Barnes & Noble bestseller list, Audacity of Hypocrisy, October 1, 2009]</ref><ref>Rush Limbaugh. [http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_111709/content/01125120.guest.html Rush Interviews Governor Sarah Palin], ''RushLimbaugh.com'', November 17, 2009.</ref><ref>Robert Shaffer. [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/ap-turns-heads-devoting-reporters-palin-book-fact-check/ AP Turns Heads for Devoting 11 Reporters to Palin Book 'Fact Check'], ''FOXNews.com'', November 17, 2009.</ref> was a record-breaking bestseller. It was the #1 bestseller in its first week<ref>http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/going-rogue-goes-to-top-of-book-sales-chart/</ref> and a million copies had sold by the end of the second week.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/01/print/main5851137.shtml</ref> Sales for the year topped two and a half million.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/01/print/main5851137.shtml</ref> Palin pledged to donate royalties from books sold during the day she visited Ft. Hood to families of victims of the Nov. 6, 2009 massacre, estimated to be about $10,000.<ref>http://www.kxxv.com/story/11625002/palins-fort-hood-visit-fun-for-troops?redirected=true</ref> ''"I'm joining the efforts of many others by donating my royalties from the book sales during our stop at Fort Hood to the families of the victims whose lives have been forever changed by the tragic events."''<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2390058/posts</ref>

* '''''"America by Heart; Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag"''''', Harper-Collins, November 2010. "Palin delivers an intimate and personal look at the woman behind the public servant. In her #1 New York Times bestselling memoir Going Rogue—the bestselling nonfiction book of 2009—Palin gave readers a look at her upbringing, her dynamic career, and her candidacy next to John McCain for the Vice Presidency of the United States. In this inspirational follow-up, her reflections on faith, family, and patriotism will read like a bible of American virtues for anyone hoping to understand the truths that lie at the heart of the nation." <ref>[http://www.harpercollins.com/books/America-Heart-Sarah-Palin/?isbn=9780062010964?AA=index_authorIntro_36341 America by Heart; Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag - Harper Collins Website]</ref>

==References==

{{reflist|2}}
{{conservatism}}
==External Links==
*[http://votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=27200 Project Vote Smart - Governor Sarah H. Palin]
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm Sarah Palin On the issues]
*[http://parentingfreedom.com/2008/09/03/sarah-palin-mother-and-first-female-vice-president-pictures-children-parenting/ Sarah Palin: Mother and First Female Vice President], ''Parenting Freedom'', September 03, 2008
*[http://churchformen.blogspot.com/2008/09/people-around-world-are-asking-who-is.html Sarah Palin, a friend of mine]
*[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDE3MmE5MDVmMGM1YjQ2NmVhMjJkN2I2ZTcxMzhlNjU=&w=MA== I Still Hate You, Sarah Palin] National Review Online
*[http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/256099/i-hate-you-bristol-palin-david-kahane?page=1 I Hate You, Bristol Palin] National Review Online
*[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/05/28/tantaros-schultz-ingraham-affair-hatred-towards-conservative-women-la Hatred Towards Conservative Women is Last Acceptable Misogyny in U.S.]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Palin, Sarah}}
[[Category:Alaska]]
[[Category:United States Mayors]]
[[Category:Alaska Governors]]
[[Category:Republican Party]]
[[Category:Republican Governors]]
[[Category:Women]]
[[Category:Tea Party Movement]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category: Conservatives]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]

Denials that atheists exist

2011-11-10T02:16:56Z

SeanS:

Occupy Wall Street

2011-11-09T15:02:53Z

SeanS: Undo revision 934428 by LifeHelper (talk) amazing that a man dead for 70 years can support this.

Leftist protest '''Occupy Wall Street''' is an ongoing anti-capitalism rally, with beginnings as an [[astroturfing]] campaign funded by a [[George Soros]] group called ''Adbusters''; invoked by [[Bill Ayers]] "Days of Rage," the first Occupy protest was staged on September 17, 2011 in [[New York City]] after months of planning by co-founder of [[SEIU]] Stephen Lerner.<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=345861 Protesters begin 'Day of Rage' against capitalism], ''[[WND]]'', September 17, 2011.</ref><ref name=SorosMoney>[http://www.theblaze.com/stories/video-exposing-occupy-wall-street-was-organized-from-day-one-by-seiu-acorn-front-the-working-family-party-and-how-they-all-tie-to-the-obama-administration-dnc-democratic-socialists-of-america/ Video Exposing How 'Occupy Wall Street' Was Organized From Day One By SEIU/ACORN Fromt – The Working Family Party, And How They All Tie To The Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America Tides And George Soros], ''[[The Blaze]]'', October 7, 2011.</ref><ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/whos-behind-wall-st-protests-110834998.html Who's behind the Wall Street protests?], ''Reuters'' (news.yahoo.com), October 13, 2011.</ref> Occupy Wall Street protesters consist of radicals, anarchists, [[Nihilism|nihilists]], college students, hippies, special interest groups, [[labor unions]] and vendors. They dislike [[capitalism]], blame [[greed]], [[Wall Street]] and the [[banks]] for economic hardship, and have been seen spitting on U.S. Military personnel.<ref>[http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/occupy-boston-protesters-spit-on-coast-guard-member-20111013 Occupy Boston Protesters Spit On Coast Guard Member], myfoxboston.com, October 13, 2011.</ref> Similar 'Occupy' demonstrations have spread to a dozen cities, and has caused thousands of arrests across the [[United States]].

The Occupy Wall Street movement was inspired by the Arab Spring protests in Cairo that were organized by the [[Muslim Brotherhood]].<ref>[http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/40397 “Day of Rage” Obama re-election team in disguise?], ''Canada Free Press'', September 2011 (Accessed October 16, 2011.</ref><ref>http://biggovernment.com/taylorking/2011/01/29/did-muslim-brotherhood-learn-day-of-rage-egypt-protest-tactics-from-obama-allies-bill-ayers-and-code-pink/</ref> Egyptians camped out in Tahir Square until [[Hosni Mubarak]] resigned.

==Historical roots==
[[File:Protesters of Occupy Knoxville oct 2011.jpg|thumb|250px|Protesters in Knoxville, Oct 2011.]]
Inspired by the Arab Spring protests in Cairo that were organized by the [[Muslim Brotherhood]], the Occupy Wall Street protesters dubbed the September 17 rally a "Day of Rage," which finds its origin in "Days of Rage," a violent set of riots waged in Chicago in 1969 by the [[Weather Underground]] [[terrorist]]s Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. Staged by [[ACORN]] and SEIU affiliates, the September 17 US Day of Rage’s mission statement is “To help facilitate state and city level organization, and to organize the federal protest at the U.S. Capitol.”<ref name=SEIUstephenlerner>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/seius-stephen-lerner-invokes-bill-ayers-days-of-rage-to-take-down-wall-street-this-september/</ref>

During an interview with ''Chicago Mag'', Ayers, who was featured on a magazine cover while standing on the American flag, with no regrets, summed up his riot’s intended purpose, stating,
{{Cquote|Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents—that‘s where it’s really at.<ref>http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/</ref><ref name=SEIUstephenlerner/><ref>http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/index.php?cparticle=2&siarticle=1#artanc</ref>}}

* In a display of anti-American hatred, 'Occupy Portland' protesters rallied behind a sort of theme song, called "F*ck the USA."<ref>''Warning: Explicit Language used in linked Video recorded at an 'Occupy' rally in Portland, OR.'' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKzGbgSe8lg&sns=em Occupy Portland Protesters Sing "F*ck the USA"], Recorded and Uploaded to [[YouTube]] on October 15, 2011.</ref>
* An Occupy Seattle protester was arrested on October 18 for exposing himself at least five times to children at Westlake Park.<ref>http://www.komonews.com/news/local/132064518.html</ref>
* An “Occupy Cleveland” protester reported to the police that she was raped in her tent over the weekend on October 15 or 16.<ref>http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/girl-raped-at-occupy-cleveland-protest/</ref>
* A leftist radical at the Occupy Dayton protest declared, “F*** the military, f*** your flag, f*** the police.”<ref>[http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-dayton-protester-f-the-military-f-your-flag-f-the-police/ Occupy Dayton Protester: ‘F*** The Military, F*** Your Flag, F*** The Police'], ''The Blaze'', October 23, 2011.</ref>

Occupy Wall Street is a protest attempting to counter the influence of the real grassroots movement, the [[Tea Party Movement]]. The protest proclaims that thousands of cities in [[America]] will join their cause and that it will spread internationally to hundreds of cities. Many misinformed people see the protests as a worthy cause, with some falsely relating it to the Tea Party.

Occupy Wall Street is neither worthy, nor is it similar to the Tea Party; although, as Barack Obama reaffirms his commitment to supporting the movement, the president has attempted to discredit the Tea Party by claiming it's related.<ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-occupy-wall-street-we-are-their-side_598251.html Obama on Occupy Wall Street: 'We Are on Their Side'], ''[[Weekly Standard]]'', October 18, 2011.</ref> The Tea Party movement is a collection of concerned citizens that care for future generations, fighting for austerity and an honest national government. Wall Street protesters are selfish, make silly demands, and have misguided rage toward job creators. Over 700 Occupy Wall Street protesters have been arrested during its first month; after more than two years, zero arrests have been made in the Tea Party movement.

Unlike the Tea Party, [[Obama]] was quick to acknowledge Occupy Wall Street, offering it credibility and a share of frustration and support. <ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-draws-closer-to-occupy-wall-street-says-obama-is-fighting-for-interests-of-the-99-2011-10 White House Draws Closer To Occupy Wall Street, Says Obama Is Fighting For The Interests Of The 99%, Business Insiders, October 16, 2011]</ref> In fact, one chant you will not find at these any of these protests is anger directed at Barack Obama. Nancy Pelosi cried upon learning about the Tea Party; she offered her blessings to Occupy Wall Street. [[Rush Limbaugh]] argued that this protest was organized by the [[White House]] and Obama. [[Bill O'Reilly]] says the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters are "far-left loons" and "anarchists."<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2011/10/09/wapos-wemple-really-disgraceful-oreilly-called-protesters-far-left-lo WaPo's Wemple: 'Really Disgraceful' That O'Reilly Called Protesters 'Far-Left Loons' and 'Anarchists'], ''[[Newsbusters]]'', October 8, 2011.</ref>.

Other reports indicate that sanitation is becoming a concern for Occupy Wall Street as the park where the protesters camp hasn't been cleaned since September 16 and [[Michael Bloomberg | Mayor Bloomberg]] indicates that the protests are costing NYC tourism dollars.

===Media Collaboration===

The [[Lamestream media | Democrat Media Complex]] is willfully covering up the violence, [[vandalism]], and anti-Semitism that truly does define the occupy movement. [[Conservative media]] has documented more than 100 incidents of their outrageous and appalling behavior. [http://biggovernment.com/jjmnolte/2011/10/28/occupywallstreet-the-rap-sheet-so-far/ See the *UPDATED* #OccupyWallStreet: The Rap Sheet, So Far]

[[Andrew Breitbart]]'s BigJournalism website shows emails from well-known media members trying to facilitate a message for the protesters, insisting on demands so as to further report on the movement. <ref>[http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2011/10/16/journolist-2-0-occupydc-emails-show-msm-dylan-ratigan-working-with-protesters-to-craft-message/ Journolist 2.0: Occupy Wall Street Emails Show MSM, Dylan Ratigan, Working With Protesters To Craft Message, BigJournalism, October 16, 2011]</ref> Rush Limbaugh says the numbers of people involved in the protest are unusually small, troubling the MSM. <ref>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/17/journalists_are_advising_protesters Journalists are Advising Protesters, Rush Limbaugh.com, October 17, 2011]</ref>

[[The Daily Caller]] is reporting that a host for government-funded [[NPR]], Lisa Simeone has emerged as spokeswoman for the “Occupy D.C.” movement
<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/19/radio-host-with-ties-to-npr-becomes-spokeswoman-for-occupy-dc/?test=latestnews#ixzz1bI7VedDL Host of NPR Show Also Serves as Spokeswoman for 'Occupy D.C.', Fox News, October 19, 2011]</ref>

[[New York Times]] reporter Natasha Lennard is not merely covering the protests, but is also taking part in planning and executing them. <ref>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/24/nyt_reporter_outed_as_protester_occupy_wall_street_caught_putting_its_money_in_an_evil_corporate_bank NYT Reporter Outed as Protester; Occupy Wall Street Caught Putting Its Money in an Evil, Corporate Bank, Rush Limbaugh.com, October 24, 2011]</ref>

The [[Washington Post]] and the New York Times have generated a total of 224 stories and opinion pieces praising the protest movement. <ref>[http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/dan-gainor/2011/10/28/postnyt-182000-words-occupy-wall-street-and-counting Post/NYT: 182,000 Words on Occupy Wall Street and Counting, Newsbusters.org, October 27, 2011]</ref>

109 clips, or 87 percent of the coverage by ABC, CBS, & NBC have produced positive protest stories. In addition, they ran 33 stories or segments about "Occupy" within the first 11 days and only 13 stories for the first year of the Tea Party movement. <ref>[http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/28/study-big-three-tv-networks-have-devoted-more-than-double-the-coverage-to-occupy-wall-street-than-the-tea-party-87-has-been-positive/ Study: Big Three TV Networks Have Devoted More Than Double The Coverage To Occupy Wall Street, Weasel Zippers, October 27, 2011]</ref>

===Astroturfing===
Reports show that Wall Street protesters are being paid to march. Manufactured, professional designed protest signs indicate [[liberal]] money is influencing the protests.<ref>[http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/9269-big-soros-money-linked-to-occupy-wall-street Big Soros Money Linked to “Occupy Wall Street”], ''New American'', October 5, 2011.</ref> A re-branded [[ACORN]] is involved with the 'Occupy' protests.<ref name=SorosMoney/>

===Lack of Direction===
[[Conservative]]s mock the movement as Occupy Sesame Street, for its childishness. Conservatives know that it's the government devaluing our currency, weakening our economy and plundering money from the next generation -- Wall Street and the banks aren't to blame. Republicans [[Mitt Romney]] and [[Herman Cain]] have denounced the protests as [[class warfare]]. <ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/06/congressional-dems-rally-in-support-of-occupy-wall-street/#ixzz1aIny1Ke7 Congressional Dems rally in support of ‘Occupy Wall Street’], Daily Caller, October 6, 2011.</ref>

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent out a fundraising email asking supporters to sign a petition in support of the protesters. President Obama said that the movement reflected "broad-based frustration about how our financial system works." <ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/186499-poll-finds-more-than-half-of-all-americans-aware-of-occupy-wall-street-protests?utm_campaign=briefingroom&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterfeed Poll finds majority of Americans aware of Occupy Wall Street protests], ''The Hill'', October 10, 2011.</ref>

==The 99% Declaration==
As part of Occupy Wall Street, a [[progressive]]-[[socialist]] organization called the 99 Percent Declaration Working Group issued the following "Declaration" on October 7, 2011.<ref>[https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/ The99PercentDeclaration]</ref>

{{Cquote|WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

WE, THE NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to form a more perfect Union, by, for and of the PEOPLE, shall elect and convene a NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY beginning on July 4, 2012 in the City Of Philadelphia.

I. Election of Delegates:

The People, consisting of all United States citizens who have reached the age of 18, regardless of party affiliation and voter registration status, shall elect Two Delegates, one male and one female, by direct vote, from each of the existing 435 Congressional Districts to represent the People at the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in Philadelphia. Said Assembly shall convene on July 4, 2012 in the city of Philadelphia.

The office of Delegate shall be open to all United States citizens who have reached the age of 18. Election Committees, elected by local General Assemblies from all over the United States, shall coordinate with the 99 Percent Declaration Working Group (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the99declaration/) to organize, coordinate and fund this national election by direct democratic voting. The Election Committees shall operate like the original Committees of Correspondence did '''before''' the first American Revolution.

II. Meeting of the National General Assembly and Deliberation:

At the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY, the 870 Delegates shall set forth, consider and vote upon a PETITION OF GRIEVANCES to be submitted to all members of Congress, The Supreme Court and President and each of the political candidates running in the nationwide Congressional and Presidential election in November 2012. The Delegates of the National General Assembly shall vote upon and implement their own agenda, propagate their own rules and elect or appoint committee members as the Delegates see fit to accomplish their goal of presenting a PETITION OF GRIEVANCES from the 99% of Americans before the 2012 elections.

III. Proposed Petition for the Redress of Grievances:

The PETITION OF GRIEVANCES shall be non-partisan and address the critical issues now confronting the People of the United States. The Delegates shall deliberate and vote upon proposals for the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES in consultation with the People as the delegates to the first two Continental Congresses did. Below is a suggested list of grievances respectfully submitted by the OWS Working Group on the 99% Declaration. The final version of the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES voted upon by the Delegates of the National General Assembly MAY or MAY NOT include the following suggested issues:

1. Implementing an immediate ban on all private contributions of money and gifts, to all politicians in federal office, from Individuals, Corporations, Political Action Committees, Super Political Action Committees, Lobbyists, Unions and all other private sources of money to be '''replaced by''' the fair and equal '''public financing''' of all federal political campaigns. We categorically REJECT the concept that money is equal to free speech because if that were so, then only the wealthiest would have a voice. These actions must be taken because it has become clear that '''politicians''' in the United States cannot regulate themselves and '''have become the exclusive''' [[Seventeenth Amendment|representatives of corporations, unions]] and the very wealthy who spend vast sums of money on political campaigns to influence the candidates’ decisions and ensure their reelection year after year.

2. The immediate reversal, even if it requires a Constitutional Amendment, of the outrageous and anti-democratic holding in the "Citizens United" case by the Supreme Court, which equates the payment of money by corporations, wealthy individuals and unions to politicians with free speech. We, the People, demand that institutional bribery and corruption not be deemed protected speech.

3. Prohibiting all federal public officials and their immediate family members, whether elected or appointed, from EVER being employed by any corporation they regulate while in office and/or holding any stock or shares in any corporation they regulate while in office until a full 5 years after their term is completed.

4. A complete lifetime ban on accepting all gifts, services, money, directly or indirectly, to any elected or appointed federal officials or their immediate family members, from any person, corporation, union or other entity that the public official was charged to regulate while in office.

5. A complete reformation of the United States Tax Code to require ALL citizens to '''pay''' a fair share of a [[progressive]], graduated [[income tax]] by '''eliminating''' loopholes, unfair '''tax breaks''', exemptions and deductions, subsidies (e.g. oil, gas and farm) and ending all other methods of evading taxes. The current system of taxation favors the wealthiest Americans, many of whom, pay fewer taxes to the United States Treasury than citizens who earn much less and pay a much higher percentage of income in taxes to the United States Treasury. We, like [[Warren Buffett]], find this income tax disparity to be fundamentally unjust.

6. Medicare for all American citizens or another [[socialized medicine|single-payer healthcare system]], adjusted by a means test (i.e. citizens who can afford it may opt-out and pay their own health insurance or opt-in and pay a means tested premium). The Medicaid program, fraught with [[corruption]] and [[fraud]], will be eliminated '''except for the purpose of providing''' emergency room care to [[illegal aliens|indigent non-citizens]] who will not be covered by the '''single-payer program'''.

7. New comprehensive regulations to '''give''' the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] '''expanded powers''' to shut down corporations, businesses or any entities that intentionally or recklessly damage the environment and/or criminally prosecute individuals who intentionally damage the environment. We also demand the immediate adoption of the most recent '''international protocols''', including the "Washington Declaration" to [[Cap and Trade|cap carbon emissions]] and implement new and existing programs to transition away from fossil fuels to reusable or carbon neutral sources of power.

8. Adoption of an immediate plan to reduce the national debt to a sustainable percentage of GDP by 2020. Reduction of the national debt to be achieved by BOTH a cut in spending to corporations engaged in perpetual war for profit, the "healthcare" industry, the pharmaceutical industry and all other sectors that use the federal budget as their income stream AND a truly '''progressive income tax code''' that does not allow the wealthy and corporations to evade taxes through excessive deductions, subsidies and loopholes. We agree that spending cuts are necessary but those cuts must be made to facilitate what is best for the People of the United States of America, not multinational and domestic corporations.

9. '''Passage of''' a comprehensive job and job-training act like the [[Stimulus bill|American Jobs Act]] to employ our citizens in jobs that are available with specialized training and by putting People to work now by repairing America's crumbling infrastructure. We also recommend the '''establishment of an online international job exchange''' to match employers with skilled workers or employers willing to train workers in 21st century skills.

10. Student loan debt relief. Our young People and students are more than $830 billion in debt from education loans alone. Payment and interest on these debts should be deferred for periods of unemployment and the principal on these loans reduced '''using a corporate tax surcharge.'''

11. Immediate passage of the [[Dream Act]] and comprehensive immigration and border security reform including offering visas, lawful permanent resident status and citizenship to the world’s brightest People to stay and work in our industries and schools after they obtain their education and training in the United States.

12. Recalling all military personnel at all non-essential bases and refocusing national defense goals to address threats posed by the geopolitics of the 21st century, including terrorism and limiting the large scale deployment of military forces to instances where Congressional approval has been granted to counter the Military Industrial Complex's goal of perpetual war for profit.

13. '''Mandating new educational goals''' to train the American public to perform jobs in a 21st Century economy, '''particularly''' in the areas of technology and '''green energy''', taking into consideration the redundancy caused by technology and the inexpensive cost of labor in China, India and other countries and paying our teachers a competitive salary commensurate with the salaries of employees in the private sector with similar skills.

14. Subject to the elimination of corporate tax loopholes and exploited exemptions and deductions stated above, offering tax incentives to businesses to remain in the United States and hire its citizens rather than outsource jobs and reconstruct the manufacturing capacity of the United States. In conjunction with a new jobs act, '''reinstitution''' of the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps '''or a similar emergency governmental agency tasked with creating new public works projects''' to provide jobs to the 46 million People living in poverty, the 9.1% unemployed and 10% underemployed.

15. Implementing of immediate legislation to encourage China and our other trading partners to end currency manipulation and reduce the trade deficit.

16. Immediate reenactment of the Glass-Steagall Act and '''increased regulation of Wall Street and the financial industry''' by the SEC, FINRA and the other financial regulators, and the commencement of a Justice Department criminal investigations into the Securities and Banking industries practices that led to the collapse of markets, $700 billion bail-out, and financial firm failures in 2007-2008.

17. Adoption of a plan similar to President Clinton’s proposal to end the mortgage crisis and instead of the Federal Reserve continuing to lower interest rates for loans to banks who are refusing to loan to small businesses and consumers, '''the Federal Reserve shall buy all underwater or foreclosed mortgages and refinance these debts at 1% or less to be managed by the newly established Consumer Financial Protection Bureau''' (and foreclosure task force described below) because 1% or less is the interest rate the Federal Reserve loans to the banks directly who hoard the cash rather than loan it to the People and small businesses.

18. An immediate one year freeze on '''all foreclosures to be reviewed by an independent foreclosure task force appointed by Congress and the Executive Branch''' to (in conjunction with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ) determine, on a case by case basis, whether foreclosure proceedings should continue based on the circumstances of each homeowner and propriety of the financial institution's conduct.

19. Subject to the above ban on all private money and gifts in politics, to enact '''additional campaign finance reform requiring''' free air time and '''public campaign finances''' to all candidates who obtain sufficient petition signatures and/or votes to participate in the primaries and/or electoral process, to shorten the campaign season and to allow voting on weekends and holidays.

20. An immediate withdrawal of all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and a substantial increase in the amount of funding needed for veteran job placement and the treatment of the physical and emotional injuries sustained by veterans in these wars. Our veterans are committing suicide at an unprecedented rate and we must help now.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that IF the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES approved by the 870 Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in consultation with the PEOPLE, is not acted upon by Congress, the President, and Supreme Court, to the satisfaction of the Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY, said Delegates shall organize a THIRD, COMPLETELY NON-PARTISAN, INDEPENDENT POLITICAL PARTY to run candidates for every available Congressional seat in the mid-term election of 2014 and again in 2016 until all vestiges of the existing corrupt corporatocracy have been removed by the ballot box.}}

==13 demands==
The content below is listed on the Occupy Wall Street website by an affiliated protester. OWS has made their intentions known that it is an unofficial post and they do not have an official list of demands. Per their website,

{{cquote|Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.}}

===Other Demands===
On September 21, 2011, an unofficial list of 11 demands (each labeled "our one demand") was posted on the Occupy Wall Street website from "the fifth communiqué."<ref>[http://occupywallst.org/article/a-message-from-occupied-wall-street-day-five/ A Message From Occupy Wall Street]</ref> The group claimed the following demands.
{{Cquote|On September 21st, 2011, Troy Davis, an innocent man, was murdered by the state of Georgia. Troy Davis was one of the 99 percent.

Ending capital punishment is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, the richest 400 Americans owned more wealth than half of the country's population.

Ending wealth inequality is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, four of our members were arrested on baseless charges.

Ending police intimidation is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, we determined that Yahoo lied about occupywallst.org being in spam filters.

Ending corporate censorship is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly eighty percent of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track.

Ending the modern gilded age is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly 15% of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing.

Ending political corruption is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of Americans did not have work.

Ending joblessness is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly one sixth of America lived in poverty.

Ending poverty is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, roughly fifty million Americans were without health insurance.

Ending health-profiteering is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, America had military bases in around one hundred and thirty out of one hundred and sixty-five countries.

Ending American imperialism is our one demand.

On September 21st, 2011, America was at war with the world.

Ending war is our one demand.}}

== Occupy Wall Street and anti-semitism ==

Several anti-Semitic incidents have been reported during "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrations in New York as Jews were blamed for the turmoil in America's financial markets. In addition, anti-Israel signs were raised against "Israel's occupation of Gaza". <ref>[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/11/occupy-wall-street-has-an-anti-semitism-problem/ Occupy Wall Street Has an Anti-Semitism Problem, Commentary.com, October 11, 2011]</ref> Anti-Semitic sign bearers and speakers who have latched onto the Occupy demonstrations have Jewish leaders in Chicago concerned. <ref>[http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4135361,00.html Anti-Semitism tainting Occupy Wall Street protests, Ynet News, October 16, 2011]</ref>

Occupy Boston protest camp marched to the building that houses the Israeli consulate and held a brief sit-in in the building’s lobby. <ref>[http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/11/stunner-jew-bashing-obama-endorsed-occupy-boston-loons-hold-sit-in-protest-at-israeli-consulate-video/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gatewaypundit2+%28Gateway+Pundit%29 Stunner… Jew-Bashing Obama-Endorsed Occupy Boston Loons Hold Sit-in Protest at Israeli Consulate, Gateway Pundit, November 5, 2011]</ref>

== Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant ==

''See also:'' [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]] and [[Liberalism and bestiality]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>

Below is an excerpt of the chant:
{{cquote|Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>}}

==Supporters, sponsors, and sympathizers that endorse Occupy Wall Street==
Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers <ref>[http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2011/10/31/the-99-official-list-of-ows/ The 99%: Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers, Pajamas media, October 31, 2011]</ref>

* [[Charlie Rangel]]
* [[Nancy Pelosi]]<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pelosi-supports-occupy-wall-street-movement/story?id=14696893#.Trf44HL4JJE Pelosi Supports Occupy Wall Street Movement - ABC News]</ref>
* [[Barack Obama]]<ref>[http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-10-11/politics/30265829_1_wall-street-middle-class-republicans It's Official: Obama Has Embraced Occupy Wall Street], bussinessinsider.com, October 10, 2011.</ref>
* [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]]<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/11/debbie_wasserman_schultz_fully_embraces_occupy_movement.html Debbie Wasserman Schultz Fully Embraces "Occupy" Movement - Real Clear Politics]</ref>
* [[Michael Moore]]
* [[Communist Party USA]]<ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-next-big-step-occupy-chicago-gives-rousing-welcome-to-communist-party-u-s-a/</ref>
* [[American Nazi Party]] <ref>[http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/figures-nazi-party-throws-support-behind-occupy-wall-street-movement/ Nazis and Communists Throw Their Support Behind Occupy Wall Street Movements, Gateway Pundit, October 15, 2011]</ref>
* [[Al Gore]]<ref>[http://www.theblaze.com/stories/al-gore-says-hes-cheering-on-the-occupy-wall-street-movement/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews Al Gore Says He's Cheering On The Occupy Wall Street Movement], ''The Blaze'', October 2011.</ref>
* [[Barney Frank]]<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66412.html</ref>
* [[Russel Simmons]]
* [[CNN]]
* [[MSNBC]]
* [[New York Times]]
* [[Washington Post]]
* [[New Black Panthers]]
* [[Van Jones]]
* [[SEIU]]
* [[George Soros]]
* [[Bill Ayers]]
* [[ACORN]]
* [[Bernie Sanders]]
* [[Russ Feingold]]<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/russ-feingold-endorses-occupy-wall-street-this-will-make-the-tea-party-look-like--a-tea-party/2011/03/03/gIQANucZNL_blog.html Russ Feingold endorses Occupy Wall Street: “This will make the Tea Party look like ... a tea party.” - Washington Post]</ref>
* [[Rosanne Barr]]
* [[Susan Sarandon]]
* [[Kanye West]]
* [[Cornel West]]
* [[Noam Chomsky]]
* [[Alec Baldwin]]
* [[John Lewis]]
* [[Arianna Huffington]]
* [[Hugo Chavez]]
* [[Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream]]
* [[Barbara Lee]]
* [[Raúl Grijalva]]
* [[Keith Ellison]]
* [[Louise Slaughter]]
* [[Dennis Kucinich]]
* [[Peter DeFazio]]
* [[John Larson]]
* [[Christiane Amanpour]]
* [[Daily Kos]]
* [[MoveOn.org]]
* [[Fred Karger]]<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/18/karger-praises-occupy-wall-street-proposes-jobs-plan/ Karger praises Occupy Wall Street, proposes jobs plan - Daily Caller]</ref>
* [[Cindy Sheehan]]<ref>[http://www.kcra.com/news/29494989/detail.html 'Occupy Wall Street' Going Global - KCRA]</ref>
* [[Mumia Abu-Jamal]]<ref>[http://www.therightscoop.com/occupy-wall-street-snags-coveted-mumia-abu-jamal-endorsement/ Occupy Wall Street snags coveted Mumia Abu-Jamal endorsement - The Right Scoop]</ref>
* [[Bill Clinton]]<ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2011/10/late-night-bill-clinton-occupy-wall-street-is-a-positive-thing.html Late Night: Bill Clinton: Occupy Wall Street is 'a positive thing' - LA Times]</ref>
* [[Lincoln Chafee]]<ref>[http://www.630wpro.com/Article.asp?id=2323467&spid=38785 Chafee: "Occupy" protestors on the right track - WPRO]</ref>
* [[Ralph Nader]]<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/consumer-advocate-ralph-nader-encourages-occupy-wall-street-222413233.html Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader Encourages "Occupy Wall Street" Protesters to Challenge Wall Street Abuses - PR Newswire]</ref>
* [[Janeane Garofalo]]<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/29/garofalo-gop-using-herman-cain-to-keep-the-racism-very-covert/ Garofalo: GOP using Herman Cain ‘to keep the racism very covert’ - The Daily Caller]</ref>
* Ayatollah [[Ali Khamenei]], Supreme Leader of [[Iran]]<ref>[http://frontpagemag.com/2011/10/14/khamenei-cheers-on-occupy-wall-street/ Khamenei Cheers On Occupy Wall Street - FrontPage Magazine]</ref>
* [[Louis Farrakhan]]<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/generation-y-politics-in-national/occupy-wall-street-protestors-nazis Occupy Wall Street protestors Nazis, maybe socialists? - The Examiner]</ref>
* [[Pete Seeger]]<ref>[http://gawker.com/5852365/pete-seeger-joins-occupy-wall-street-with-this-little-light Pete Seeger Joins Occupy Wall Street With ‘This Little Light’ - Gawker]</ref>
* [[Patrick Leahy]]<ref>[http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/92394/ Leahy Hopes Occupy Movement Plays Role In 2012 Elections - Vermont Public Radio]</ref>
* [[Meghan McCain]]<ref>[http://powerwall.msnbc.msn.com/politics/my-day-at-occupy-wall-street-1705384.story - The Daily Beast]</ref>
* [[Jesse Jackson]]<ref>[http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/10/jesse_jackson_literally_links.html Jesse Jackson Literally Links Arms With Occupy Wall Street Protesters to Protect Medical Tent - New York Magazine]</ref>

==See also==
* [[One Nation]]
* [[Restore Sanity rally]]
* [[Save the American Dream rally]]
* [[Tea Party movement]]

==References==
<references/>

{{liberalism}}

==External links==
* [http://occupywallst.org/ OccupyWallSt.org]
* [http://twitter.com/#!/OccupyArrests Occupy arrests tracker on Twitter]
* [http://www.breitbart.tv/sick-of-media-comparing-occupy-wall-street-to-tea-party-watch-this/ What is Occupy Wall Street? Fox News]
* [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049137/Occupy-Wall-Street-Violence-erupts-police-clash-protesters.html Occupy Wall Street Violence Erupts]
* [http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2011/09/us-day-of-rage-occupy-wall-street-acorn-seiu-robin-hood-tax-new-constitution/ Us Day of Rage, Occupy Wall Street: ACORN, SEIU, Robin Hood Tax, New Constitution]
* [http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/40397 “Day of Rage” Obama re-election team in disguise?]
* [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/seius-stephen-lerner-invokes-bill-ayers-days-of-rage-to-take-down-wall-street-this-september/ SEIU's Stephen Lerner Invokes Bill Ayers 'Days of Rage' To Take Down Wall Street This September]
* [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/11/04/giuliani-obama-owns-occupy-wall-street Giuliani: "Obama Owns Occupy Wall Street"]

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Activists]]
[[Category:Liberal Organizations]]
[[Category: Anti-American]]
[[Category:Anarchists]]

User talk:Jpatt

2011-11-03T01:17:37Z

SeanS: /* Privatized military */

== Archive 2008 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/Subway_Troll Here]

== Archive 2009 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2009]

== Archive 2010 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2010]

== Your block policy ==

I was just wondering; why are you blocking people with the reason that they don't give their name?

People can simply say whatever name they wanted and you wouldn't know if it is true or not.
More importantly the account creation page states that submitting your name is '''optional'''
Can please explain the reasoning behind your block policy?

ps: I'd appreciate you not blocking me merely for asking this question. I just ask out of curiosity ;)

Thanks.

[[User:Philny|Philny]] 18:20, 4 January 2011 (EST)
:Just as it is optional for first name last initial, the block policy is of the administrators discretion. It helps eliminate sock accounts used by [troll]]s and if the user is truly interested in contributing in good faith, they will recreate their username as commanded. Do users/trolls use fake names? absolutely. Are you really Phil? I chose not to recreate your account but I could be wrong about you. Time will tell. Hope this is a sufficient answer. Have a great day! --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:28, 4 January 2011 (EST)

:::Jpatt. In all honesty I don't see how your practice would help eliminate sock accounts. People can simply lie about who they are. Socks are best controlled through an IP range block if you asked me.
::Lastly I would think that good faith would be assumed for new people until they explicitly become trolls/vandals. but hey that's just me.
::I'm still trying to get rid of those liberal Wikipepdia ways. [[User:Philny|Philny]] 19:54, 4 January 2011 (EST)

:::Is it foolproof? No. They are not blocked from contributing just blocked from using that name. So it is of good faith on our part to allow them to recreate a username. I did not create the policy and I was subject to the same policy when I first joined. We'll banish someone when needed and we will ferret out those fake accounts over time. To obey an administrators request is the first step toward recognizing a good faith contributor.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:18, 4 January 2011 (EST)

::::Hi. My former name was STramp, but you seem to have decided that that cannot be my real name. I'm not quite sure why?[[User:StevenTramp|StevenTramp]] 21:23, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

== Re:Welcome! ==

Thanks for the welcome! I'll be sure to read the Editor's Guide ;) --[[User:AznBurger|AznBurger]] 21:36, 19 January 2011 (EST)

== Conservative 3737, "everything you say is conservative" ==

...but really not [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Chris_Matthews&curid=10356&diff=846659&oldid=846644 family-friendly.] Thanks for heading him off! [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:32, 5 February 2011 (EST)

:The IP is a school and he didn't actually cuss which would cross the line. I am willing to give a second chance if the rules are followed. BTW, I hope no hard feelings for targeting you in the past. Your edits were excellent.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:38, 5 February 2011 (EST)
::Life is too short for hard feelings. Good call on the "second chance" thing. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:39, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Hello, there is a reason I don't use my real name ==

I'll write you an email about it if you like, I would have before but you locked the email so I could not. Account creation was also turned off, which makes recreating my account difficult. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy2|AlaskanEconomy2]] 20:43, 8 February 2011 (EST)
:I now feel pretty foolish not having checked this account before creating that one. Thanks/sorry. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:52, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for uploading that image yesterday. With regards to my username, I created it before there was any specific username policy on Conservapedia's Guidelines or Commandments page (even though I've only been contributing recently). If it is important that I have username that contains only my name/initials, I will change it. --[[User:Toadaron|Toadaron]] 17:40, 18 February 2011 (EST)

== New conservative pages for 2011 ==

I noticed you were laying down plans for pages to create. I think you might consider making a page on the pence amendment, the recent 240-185 house vote to amend Title X to remove the family planning grants from organizations that perform abortions (like planned parenthood). While I support the decision the issue is outside of my area of specialization and I am afraid of getting some important facts wrong. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:Maybe at some future point. It's too early to determine the outcome. You're welcome to start it.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:45, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== uploading images ==

How can I upload non-political, non-controversial images that I made myself to Conservapedia? I suppose you or the Conservapedia administration would like to preview images before uploading them? How do I show them for you to preview? [[User:HPadleckas|HPadleckas]] 21:34, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:Send to conservapedia@zoho.com--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

==Celebrity crime==

Hi, Jpatt. I'm wondering how and when we should report (gloat over?) celebrity crime, like a female pop star arrested for being drunk in public, getting a speeding ticket, etc. Are we trying to prove that Hollywood produces (or encourages) self-indulgent behavior, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:53, 2 March 2011 (EST)

:Personally, I don't have a litmus test for inclusion. I simply take celebrities, be it Democrat or Republican, and post their crimes. As role models, they need to be exposed as to why they make headlines. Their behavior is an example of who "not to follow". If you have suggestions, of course I would work with you. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:04, 2 March 2011 (EST)

::I had nothing in mind, just trying to stimulate thought here. Carry on, my good man! :-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 01:21, 5 March 2011 (EST)

== Delete ==

Hey Jpatt - I manually copy-pasted move a page from [[Frankfurt school]] to [[Essay:Frankfurt school]] - but upon examining the content it appears that the original author - CharlieO - copy pasted that from another site. Could you delete both pages? Thanks!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 18:50, 26 March 2011 (EDT)
:No problem. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:57, 26 March 2011 (EDT)

==Photo upload==
Hi, I would like to upload a photo of myself, I don't have the rights, can you do it for me? Thanks.--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 20:35, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Yes, send to conservapedia@zoho.com --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:19, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Thanks. :)--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:23, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

I just sent it to you. :) --[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:32, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

:Done. [http://www.conservapedia.com/images/4/42/Me.jpg]--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:41, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

Thank you. :)--[[User:SarahWollstone|SarahWollstone]] 21:44, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

== I need you to check your email ==

K? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 23:20, 27 April 2011 (EDT)

== nice reversions! ==

You're fast, sir.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 19:50, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
:Did you hear? I'm Quick Draw McGraw!--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:54, 2 May 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you ==

Thank you for the helpful links and the welcome. I hope to become a valuable member of the community.

== Editing the Wicca page ==

I would like to formally request that the "murders" section be removed for the reasons stated on the talk page.

This is not a place to smear other people or post inflammatory material. {{unsigned|HarabecW}}

:I digress, this is a place to educate others and to warn them to stay clear of witchcraft. Find another topic to edit. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:30, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

::I have looked at some of the disputed links, and while I don't know enough about the sources themselves to question their reliability, for most of the stories no causal relationship is established between the person's religious beliefs and their actions. One might just as well divide any story about crime between those where the perpetrator was male or female and argue that their gender was the causal factor. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 22:41, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

:::A person's beliefs and their actions are always tied together whether you agree or not. If Wiccans start making the news for rape, I will start a new section. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:10, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

== Stubs ==

Do we use stub tags here on Conservapedia?-[[User:StevenTramp|StevenTramp]] 23:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)
:It's not really recommended or necessary.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:35, 11 May 2011 (EDT)

== Mistake of an email ==

I sent you an email raising a question - having seen the new evidence you can safely ignore it - sorry for that!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 20:05, 12 May 2011 (EDT)

==Ravens==

I noticed you reverted changes made to the Tower of London article that mentioned the legend of the ravens. I know you banned the editor for vandalism, but in this case, the story is true. There is a legend telling that if the ravens at the Tower leave, it portends the downfall of both the Tower and the kingdom. I know it's trivia, but it's fun too and I'd love to see it added back into the article. Here's a link about the story. http://www.hrp.org.uk/TowerOfLondon/stories/theravens.aspx [[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 21:32, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
:No problem. Go ahead and add it back.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:38, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks! I'll add the reference too.[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 22:36, 12 May 2011 (EDT)

== Religion headline ==

Hi - that's a great news story, but I wonder if I may suggest a small change to the wording? At present is says "study came up with similar findings" but no other findings are listed to be similar too; it's an out of context quote.

I'd suggest saying something like "'''[[Religion]] comes naturally, even instinctively, to human beings,''' says a 3-year, multi-million Pound survey conducted by Oxford University." Maybe even add that it is a liberal institution, that offered tenure to Richard Dawkins? [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 12:25, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

== Maria Shriver ==

Hi - I noticed you added "Schwarzenegger" for Shriver's last name. I don't believe she ever changed her name legally and has never gone by the name "Schwarzenegger". [[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 10:25, 20 May 2011 (EDT)
:Ok, I'll remove it. After her divorce she can go from Mrs. Maria Shriver to Ms. Maria Shriver. New age liberals are a joke. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:19, 20 May 2011 (EDT)

== user:JimMac ==

Hi - this user is vandalising articles and constantly reverting me. Please can you show him the door? [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 10:52, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

==[[Raymond Davis Affair]]==
Do you know anything of this? The Obama administration evidently invoked Islamic law to circumvent the judicial system in Pakistan to obtain a Blackwater (or whatever) operative in Pakistan only weeks before the Abbotobad raid. People in Pakistan are very upset. The democratically elected regime & military are cooperating with the US because they fear Islamic fundementalism, yet when it suits him, Obama pays $2.3 million in blood money under Koranic law to get a hired mercenary out. Ironic. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:03, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:I haven't heard this but it wouldn't surprise me.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:07, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
::Raymond was CIA--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:07, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

== user:Jefferson ==

I wasn't sure how to contact you other than this, please let me know if there is another way if you would be so kind. I was not aware of the policy against using fact tags, thank you for informing me. I had seen them used in several articles and assumed it was okay. I would appreciate if you would clear something up for me about the citation policy, please: why is it the responsibility of a person who discovers uncited work to find the citation rather than the original poster of the work? I thought it would have been in the spirit of the encyclopedia's "no gossip" rules that statements should be cited and that calling attention to uncited materials would be helpful in clearing the site of gossip. Thanks again for filling me in and not banning me outright to begin with. I appreciate the help![[User:Jefferson|Jefferson]] 23:25, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

:Jefferson, thanks for the mature response. It is the original poster who is supposed to reference. Our suggestion is if you find questionable content, put it on the talk page. If it can be discussed through, then someone can add a citation. If nobody questions the talk page, feel free to delete the questionable content. Unfortunately, this is not spelled out for new users yet. In the scope of ideology, a liberal would find fault with every conservative sentence. So there may be citation requests on other pages but it is not an acceptable form of contribution here. Let me know if I can be of any help. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:47, 3 June 2011 (EDT)
::Perhaps it would be useful to delete the fact tag template all together? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 23:49, 3 June 2011 (EDT)
:::I don't know why I didn't think of that. For some reason I thought it was built-in to wikimedia but it's a tag, sure it should be deleted. Will discuss with Aschlafly.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:52, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

== No rules found for editing a new article ==
The rules encourage discussion of intent of substantial edit of established articles, and discourage taking liberties of simply substantially editing those articles with no prior discussion. But, I have been substantially editing articles which I have created, and which no one else has either edited or commented on ('invisible' editors). Should I discuss with 'invisible' editors my intent of substantial edits of articles in regard to which they are 'invisible'?[[User:PatternOfPersona|PatternOfPersona]] 21:09, 6 June 2011 (EDT)
:The short answer is no. Discussions will be made upon disagreements. Substantial edits to established articles need not require approval either. Though if you are deleting content instead of adding to or replacing a viewpoint, then you will face resistance from other contributors and reverts. Hope that helps. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:17, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

== Uncited Sentences ==
"[[Conservapedia:Footnotes_-_technical_help#Completely_Uncited_Article_or_Completely_Uncited_Section_of_an_Article|If a sentence needs to be cited please use the "fact" template at the end of the sentence.]]" I'm only following Conservapedia protocol. -[[User:StudioFire|StudioFire]] 00:14, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

I also suggest that you reread the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]], which include: "''Everything'' you post must be ''true'' and ''verifiable''." as well as "''Do not post personal opinion'' on an encyclopedia entry." There should be a Commandment for Ad hoc reasoning, seeing as how that seems to justify much of the content on this site...[[User:StudioFire|StudioFire]] 00:25, 11 June 2011 (EDT)
:That includes you, StudioFire. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:56, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

::Thanks for the immature response StudioFail which proves the reasoning on the fact tags. We allow content from liberals but if we let them add citation requests- they'll find something wrong with every page.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 10:08, 11 June 2011 (EDT)

== revision delete ==

What's the point of oversighting vandals if all they do is blank the page?--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 15:29, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

:Aesthetics, red links are messy. Just so you know, France won the 100 year war between England and most of their colonial wars in Africa.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:07, 19 June 2011 (EDT)
:: <nowiki>:D</nowiki> I've a feeling that French military history is going to be something of a meme around my presence. Someone who dislikes France might say France took their time kicking the British out during the 100 years war. Someone who likes France would then refer you to William the Conqueror. Then we'd be told that William the Conqueror doesn't count, because he wasn't French, he was a Normand. Never mind that because of his conquest of England English courts spoke French for 300 years after his death. The whole subject is rather tired to me. I've never been one for Patriotism, either for France or the USA. I know better than to associate myself with the failures and achievements of others just because we share an ethnic group or political boundaries.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 16:18, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

== Dike! ==

What brought on that reversion to a perfectly innocuous edit? --[[User:XavierC|XavierC]] 21:12, 27 June 2011 (EDT)

:Just curious as to your intentions. Carry on great patron saint.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:14, 27 June 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you for your kind welcome! ==

I appreciate it. =) -Melissa Fox, 2011

== Regarding "Fair and balanced is not part of the Conservative platform" Essay ==

I was surprised at the boldness of this essay. Have you ever read George Orwell's ''Animal Farm''? If not, I'd like to suggest you at least read a comprehensive synopsis of it. It has the very famous line "All animals are equal, but some animals are ''more'' equal than others.", and I couldn't help but feel that your essay had the same viewpoint (except with humans, obviously).

Another quote from the book for you to consider:

{{Cquote|Do not imagine, comrades, that leadership is a pleasure. On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility. No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?|20px|20px|George Orwell's ''Animal Farm''}}

Perhaps you can see the slight correlation I made between the your essay and ''Animal Farm''. I do not write this in spite, and I have no malicious intentions...I just thought I'd use my First Amendment right to instigate some casual, intelligent conversation. --[[User:LifeHelper|LifeHelper]] 13:38, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:I did read Animal Farm about 25 years ago. Subconscience-based viewpoint? You are what you fill your mind with but I wrote it due to liberals insistence that Conservapedia be fair. A lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it and the truth is still the truth, even if nobody believes it. To be fair is to give lies equal time. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:59, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::Forgive me for quoting Orwell again;

{{Cquote|If all records told the same tale — then the lie passed into history and became truth.|20px|20px|George Orwell's ''1984''}}

Food for thought! -[[User:LifeHelper|LifeHelper]] 14:27, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

A lie never becomes the truth, only puts on the appearance of truth, clothed in the truth but at heart, still a lie. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:09, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::"A just weight and balance are the LORD's." -- Proverbs, 16:11. [[User:DavidHRG|DavidHRG]] 14:34, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:::Sure, I believe that. Judgement is for the Lord. "What is desirable in a man is his kindness, and it is better to be a poor man than a liar." --Proverbs 19:22 So we are able to tell what is wrong and what is right, we don't wait for His judgement to tell us.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:57, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

== BHO ==

Hi. I was just curious as to why you deleted my edit to the Obama page. Because last time I checked, I could source my claim, and yours just happened to be hear-say conspiracy theory that you're wasting your time with. If you're searching for the truth and not slander why not go with the claim that can be proven like mine? - http://conservapedia.com/User:MAVE182

:Mave182, maybe you didn't read my message to you. Proven claims... kidding right? How do you get proof when the person were talking about hasn't yet disclosed it? Hear-say, conspiracy theory? Here is my message to you, again. '' a few mass visits, black liberation theology, invitation for atheists to join WH Faith-based initiatives, no baptism record and much more secrecy. The refs just don't legitimize Obama's faux Christianity.'' Let me add his disdain for traditional marriage, his support of death to womb children, his constant pandering to the Muslim faith? He's as Christian as much as Stalin was.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:02, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

Hey my conservative brethren. In case you don't know what proven means, here's how. You say something then back it up with evidence, not free floating hate speech you heard from Glenn Beck. Cite just one of those claims with a source that agrees, and be source i mean something legitimate. As for my claim, here's a few things that back up his Christianity.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36287446/Www-barackobama-com-Factcheck-2007-11-12-Obama-Has-Never
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27775757
http://www.ucc.org/news/obama-inauguration.html
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1907610,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303619.html
http://www.newsweek.com/2008/07/11/finding-his-faith.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOOCABMz6jg
You shouldn't deny truth just because it doesn't cater to your narrow minded, slandering viewpoint.
--[[User:MAVE182|MAVE182]] 22:20, 1 July 2011 (EDT) 

Love how you provide ''the drinkers of Obama's bathwater'' as proof. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:29, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

::Hi JPatt. I gave the guy a day to review the site and its aims. Personally I don't agree with many of the things on Conservapedia but I respect its rules and understand its right to present what information it does. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:10, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

:::The truth is non-negotiable, lack of agreement is not an easy thing to digest. As I observe on social media, the right is magnifying each and every flaw in their candidates. Let's hope that our common sense and values overcome the many flaws we all have.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:26, 1 July 2011 (EDT)
::::From our flaws we find perfection.[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 03:09, 2 July 2011 (EDT)

Tolaration of more than one religion doesnt make you a bad christian. In fact, I believe if you can't do that, it makes you a very poor Christian. And if you prefer, here's a source that doesn't drink obama's bathwater, but rather chugs the radical right's urine. http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/09/28/obama-christian-choice
As for Max, the entire point of this site is putting up a non-bias viewpoint that is based on fact. Fact is, Barack Obama is a practicing Christian. You may disagree with his politics which is fine, but according to the 1st Ammendment, this man shouldn't be denied the right to practice his religion and shouldn't be slandered as a Christian for unrelated issues. --[[User:MAVE182|MAVE182]] 17:01, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

:I refuse to reply to any future posts of yours on my page. Your sharp tongue speaks all righteous leftist points, a Cafeteria Christian, one that ignores Intrinsic Evil and an apologist for outright sin. What Christian would support the evil that Obama supports? You slander Glenn Beck, you slander Fox News and then you have to gall to call me a slanderer. You can chose to live like the pigs do but you aren't fooling anyone here, you hear?--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:16, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

::It's very simple MAVE and since you came off ''your'' high horse, I guess that does merit a response. I am talking beyond accuracy and beyond statistics. I am talking about absolutes. Who are you MAVE? Let's talk about MAVE, hidden in the shadows, full of knowledge- yet identity unknown, a keyboard diva? To continue to communicate with you would mean I have to match wits with an unknown, convert you into my way of thinking. When I know already that you are passionate, yet deceptive, not intent to learn, only to play games and waste time. Just because I will call out wrong and confront evil, don't try and pass it off as like I'm trying to act as a tough guy. You just make yourself sound thuggish. Jesus rules! Amen. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:19, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

== I thought you might enjoy this ==

*[[Essay: Acute Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]]

::Fixed typo [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 20:01, 2 July 2011 (EDT)

==Book of Tobit==

Hi Jpatt; I was looking for the Conservapedia article on the Book of Tobit; it's a red link in the Bible article. If I read the search results correctly, you deleted it. May I ask why? I'm interested in working on an article about Tobit unless there's a good reason for omitting from Conservapedia. Thanks in advance --[[User:Bwebster|Bwebster]] 19:27, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

:I don't recall deleting but it may have been a copied source. Please, recreate how you feel best. Incorporate deleted information if it is valid.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 3 July 2011 (EDT)

== John Adams "Notable Quote" Error ==

I just came across the article on John Adams and I found an error. You listed as a notable quote "[The Declaration of Independence] That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity." However the accompanying footnote takes you to Gingrich's book, Rediscovering God in America pg 6 at Google books where the quote is attributed to John ''Quincy'' Adams. Im new to Conservapedia so I dont know if I should go ahead and make the edit. I'll just leave it to you. --[[User:JR|JR]] 13:20, 10 July 2011 (EDT)
:Newbie, nice to meet you. Now that is a good catch and clearly an error on my part. In the future, no harm nor foul to edit pages. Quotes are tough to verify. Sites like Brainyquote will not suffice. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:00, 10 July 2011 (EDT)
::And just to add on a reason to not trust them: often those sites don't distinguish between a quote by a person, and a quote about that person, so who actually said it is unclear, especially when the quote doesn't have the name in it. - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 00:59, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Nice to meet you too. Ive read the edit policy since my post so Im up to speed on what to do now. Thanks! --[[User:JR|JR]] 19:59, 10 July 2011 (EDT)

== Thank you ==
Thank you for moving my new article to one with a proper name. I wasn't sure how to go about it, so thank you. Any tips on how to edit/create articles would help alot, if you have the time of course. --[[User:CAndrs|CAndrs]] 20:10, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

== Quadrupling Conservapedia's traffic ==

I have a simple plan which I think could quadruple Conservapedia's web traffic in a short time that will not cost any money. I should find out in a week if I get the cooperation of a couple of key individuals. The only downside of my plan is it doesn't involve the concepts of [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|machismo]], [[Atheism and obesity|mentioning the obesity with any subcultures]] or referring to [[Essay: Atheism is a clown and it did not know it|atheism as a worldview for clowns.]] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:45, 14 July 2011 (EDT)
:::I think my simple plan will be implemented based on some receptive feedback I received. I have to implement some things first. Not sure how fast it will happen though. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:26, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

== FOIA ==
[[User:FOIA]] has been blocked? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:24, 15 July 2011 (EDT)
:Never mind. I see what happened. Good block. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:40, 15 July 2011 (EDT)

== Singer images ==

I found some replacements from the Wikimedia Commons. They're on the page now. Thanks!!!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 08:18, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

I thank you greatly, Jpatt!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:57, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

== Unblocked ==

Thanks. --[[User:Michaeldsuarez|Michaeldsuarez]] 09:06, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

== Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel ==

Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel. I invited someone to edit Conservapedia and they were blocked and they should not have been. I got the block overturned. So I think there is room for improvement in Conservapedia's blocking policy. You can sign up [[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|HERE]]. I invited active Syops/Admins plus people with blocking rights who might wish to be Sysops. If I left anyone out, please let them know about the panel. The people with blocking rights can sign up [[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|HERE]]. The panel will probably convene when Iduan is back from his summer vacation or fairly soon afterwards. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:47, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Thanks for the invite. I decline.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:17, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I knew you would decline, but I didn't want to be impolite. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:19, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== Vandalism ==

Thanks for undoing the vandalism on my page!--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 14:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== Brewmaster's degree ==

Hi JPatt, I noticed that you added [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Worst_College_Majors&curid=102717&diff=901252&oldid=891798 brewmaster] to the list of "worst college majors." That made me think of a friend of mine who is an actual brewmaster. Would you believe that he can basically live anywhere he wants to, and there will always be a job for him wherever he goes (provided there are breweries nearby)? In whatever economy, anywhere in the world, there's a built-in demand for what he's capable of making. I'd call that a pretty darned good major. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 16:28, 15 August 2011 (EDT)
:LOL, yeah I think i would enjoy being a brewmaster. Doesn't sound too stressful. Anyway, I gained the insight from this months Popular Science magazine Awesome Labs- 25 of the coolest places to pursue science. Anyway, it costs alot of money to go to college. Learning to brew your own beer is done by millions of people without a degree. "Every year, 10 or so student gain careers in small business" - says the brewmaster professor. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:54, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

==Ferrari==
What is up with these guys? I can barely think of a more objective fact than "Ferraris are overpriced." Even Ferrari owners wouldn't argue with me, being overpriced is part of why people buy them so they can show off their money. How do I proceed? --CraigF 3:59 August 16th (ETC)
:Ok, I think they final got my logic. [[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 4:01, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
::Me personally, I like the Lamborghini. It is however, a bit overpriced as well.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:44, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I like Lambos too, sort of the muscle cars of Italy, but I've still seen them get trounced by American iron too many times to justify their huge price tags. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 22:27, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
==[[Henry Ford]]==
Sorry to bother you again, but I'm having trouble. I tried to remove some slanderous remarks from the Henry Ford page, but people reverted me and demanded references to refute a bunch of propaganda designed to harm Ford's reputation. At the same time they want references to prove an obvious fact that Ferdinand Porsche happily worked with the Nazis. I don't really get it, this is an pro American wiki that is focused on fact not propaganda. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 00:43, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
:Sorry again, it looks like it was resolved, I guess I was wrong. I guess it is good that I am learning, but I'm going to have to really evaluate my thinking. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 01:08, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

== Vandal ==

Pleas block vandal. http://conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/HankK
:Thank you. --[[User:ZachJ|ZachJ]] 16:49, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

:| Liberal wandal terminated. I expect we'll see him again before public school is back in session. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:54, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
== Removing facts ==
Ok I admit I was wrong about Henry Ford. History isn't my best subject, but SharonW keeps removing well known facts from my articles and says she can't find references. I found some references and readded what I said, but what if she changes it back, I get the impression she doesn't know that much about cars. I have to go to bed, so don't worry about responding unitl tomorrow. --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 02:52, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
:I like the pages you are adding. With that said, we take this project seriously. I suggest you let others change your work as they see fit. They'll likely take the edge off your comments but the rest remains, don't take it personal. I'll back you up my friend, just keep adding and let me know any problems that occur. We will work through it together.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:37, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks Jpatt! --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 16:11, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

== RLorian's block ==

Hi, JPatt. RLorian was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&curid=114693&diff=906987&oldid=906984 reverting vandalism]. not really edit-warring. [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 13:27, 28 August 2011 (EDT)

==Conservapedia down sometimes==
Hi Jpatt, I've noticed that sometimes Conservapedia goes down while I'm using it. The really weird thing is that this only seems to happen after I make a couple of edits. I took a break from editing for a few days and never had any problems reading articles, but today I started editing again and after a couple of minutes I couldn't open any pages. Am I the victim of cyber attacks?
--[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 21:03, 29 August 2011 (EDT)
:No. IT just happens every so often as far as I can tell.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:04, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

== Wait a minute ==

Doesn't McCain have his favorite American hero story? Why was he swapped out? I mean, keep Reagan, but you should still keep McCain. I don't know that Reagan has a famous military story to tell. --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 15:00, 3 September 2011 (EDT)

:It's a gallery of American heroes, not necessarily war heroes. Reagan led the collapse of the Soviet Union. McCain on the other hand is respected for his service to country during captivity, not actually a leader of hero caliber. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:14, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
::My understanding was that the Soviet Union would collapse anyway. Communism cannot sustain itself! --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 16:01, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It was going to collapse. Reagan's big military thing only made it worse for them because they had to keep pace.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 16:23, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Reagan gets the credit just like B Hussein Obama can get credit for Bin Laden. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:22, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
:The US actually was more intimately involved with the capturing and killing of Bin Laden because our very own men and women did it. Credit to CIA!!! --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 17:24, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
::There is a long list of those that deserve credit, starting with Gen. Petraeus. Obama ultimately gets the nod because as leader, he kept Bush's policies in place to finish what was started. As far as the "gutsy call" the lib media tried to portray-- that's balderdash. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:28, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
==Vandalism==
I found some liberal vandalism that [[User:TerryB]] put into the dictionary project. I fixed it, but he probably should be blocked. He used the edit summary "improve" and said that conservatives forbid you to marry who you love, a ridiculous notion. I'm also having problems with other liberals trying to water down a variety of definitions, what can be done? --[[User:CraigF|CraigF]] 01:29, 7 September 2011 (EDT)
:There is more than one liberal troll adding nonsense to the dictionary project. I will go through the project today and remove false entries and individuals from Conservapedia deserving of a block. Thanks Craig. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 09:22, 7 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Great job limiting the amount of vandalism in that recent vandal attack. Of course, Phase III of Conservapedia gaining additional web traffic is totally impervious to CP vandals significantly affecting it. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:13, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

== Request for Admin assistance ==

To all senior admins and sysops. I am being repeatedly abused by user:conservative who, among other things, accuses me continuously of being an atheist simply because I point out some of the holes in his articles. See [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=113357&diff=924642&oldid=924636 here for the latest accusation]. I have asked him numerous times to desist with his sneering name calling as I find it offensive to have my faith questioned and nothing is ever done. He state’s I am atheist because I don’t agree with some of his ridiculous contentions. In actual fact it isn’t even that I disagree with him it is that I point out his shoddy research, poor scholarship and his berating, insulting and sarcastic behaviour towards others. I am of the opinion now that he is purposely calling me names because he knows I don’t like it which is unchristian, impolite and, above all, insulting. Is anyone going to teach this man some manners? Has Conservapedia become a place where Conservative is allowed to behave this way without any warning or comeuppance but all other editors and warned and blocked for minor infractions. He is in continual violation of the commandments yet NOTHING is done whereas people like myself are always watching out to avoid being banned. Well, fine, ban me if you like. I probably will be after this posting and no doubt Conservative will cackle with glee at “winning” again. But laugh Conservative, you win nothing. I post this is full knowledge that I might be blocked banned and insulted by you in my absence and I have always remained polite and civil plus I can hold my head up high. Hopefully one of you will take a stand and insist on standards of civility. But I don’t hold out much hope. Thanks, many of you were kind, decent people whom I enjoyed working with and I pray for you. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:22, 5 October 2011 (EDT)

==Hi==
If Scooby doo is not an acceptable article, then why is [[South Park]]? Your friend Mac. {{unsigned|MacStennis}}

:I don't find any of your contributions to be genuine.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 02:16, 11 October 2011 (EDT)

== Bill Ayers and OWS ==

So you're currently in violation of the first commandment of CP. There is not a single shred of evidence supporting the idea that Ayers said that quote. In fact there's all the evidence saying he didn't. The website linked does not say he said that at all. It doesn't even imply it. Also, if you search that phrase and "bill ayers" there are two hits. The article linked and the article on OWS here. Meanwhile a search for that phrase comes up with literally dozens of articles which don't mention him at all. You're supporting a blatant, unsupported lie by putting it back. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo]] 15:18, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

:What a tough guy you are hiding behind that keyboard. I was going to change it when it was first brought to the talk page. Aschlafly reviewed it and made a slight addition. A blatant lie? Do you think he has never said such a thing? Do you think that he has nothing but the best intentions for this country? The only thing wrong I see is your support for Ayers and your lame attempt to make a stink.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:53, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

== Important 7 minute video News Story ==

This was posted to ''[[The Blaze]]'' yesterday: [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/marxist-revolution-beck-shows-oreilly-how-organized-effort-guides-world-wide-occupy-protests/ Glenn Beck on Bill O'Reilly: 'How the Marxist Revolution Plans to De-Threat the Tea Party]. It's a 7 minute video, but I think it's incredibly valuable information that the public should know -- but the [[MSM]] will never report. Beck clarifies everything the public needs to know about [[Occupy Wall Street]]. [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 00:07, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
:I'll give it a look, thanks.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:09, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

== Departmento Munitorum ==

Thanks for the removal of ordnance discussion earlier. Textbook stuff. [[User:RexBanner|RexBanner]] 23:25, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
:I don't know what you're talking about but please, pull up a chair and let's chat.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:33, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
::I'd love to, but I don' want to be blocked on the 90/10 rule... [[User:RexBanner|RexBanner]] 23:39, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
:::Be bold young man, don't fear the reaper. I am not aware of any CP students falling victim to the 90/10 rule. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:54, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
::::Ok! What shall we discuss? [[User:RexBanner|RexBanner]] 11:27, 20 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::Rebel Rex fallen prey, we'll chat in a few weeks.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:25, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

== Privatized military ==

We shouldn't have to pay taxes to the government for the military, it should be private. [[User:JohnPaulJonesRevWar|JohnPaulJonesRevWar]] 12:08, 29 October 2011 (EDT)
:I'd just like to comment on this and recommend a reading of the book "Jennifer Government". It's Capitalism and small government taken to an extreme and shows why your idea is not only insane, but very stupid. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:17, 2 November 2011 (EDT)

== Gibberish accounts ==

I blocked all those gibberish accounts sine they are more than likely spammers. I hope that was OK. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 20:31, 2 November 2011 (EDT)

:Yep, great job.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:32, 2 November 2011 (EDT)

Hollywood values

2011-11-03T01:15:25Z

SeanS: Undo revision 933397 by Hetgar (talk) and?

[[File:Hollywood-sign wikimedia.jpg|right|200px]]
'''Hollywood values''' are characterized by decadence, [[narcissism]], rampant [[drug|drug use]], [[adultery|extramarital sex]] leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted [[disease]], [[abortion]], lawlessness and the promotion of the [[homosexual agenda]]. Such values have a very negative influence on the life of individuals, and very often lead to death. A 2006 poll by MSNBC said that 60% of [[Americans]] agree that "Hollywood's values are not in line with the rest of America and that the quality of movies has diminished in recent years."<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11714540/</ref>

The lack of [[morals]] and [[values]] in [[Hollywood]] culture has been destroying the fabric of American culture, particularly the family.

There have been, however, a handful of prominent people whose work in Hollywood opposed these values. [[Ronald Reagan]], [[James Stewart]], [[Charlton Heston]], [[Pat Boone]], [[Paul Schofield]], [[Walt Disney]] and many others practiced conservative values while working in Hollywood and the productions of these and many others also reflect these values, irrespective of the star names associated with them: [[The Chronicles of Narnia]] and ''Independence Day'' (a movie about [[Independence Day]]) being recent examples.

Hollywood values include a flagrant disrespect and disregard for:

* [[marriage]] and [[abstinence]]
* [[patriotism]]
* [[religion]] and [[spirituality]] (Hollywood's profits depend on the [[advertising]] and sale of [[materialism|material goods]] and other superficial "solutions" to problems.)
* [[accountability]]
* the U.S. military<ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/hollywood_gets_it_right_p4d84a9jyymsfLw0THb7EM Hollywood gets it right, New York Post, March 09, 2010]</ref>
* family responsibilities, like childrearing<ref>[[Britney Spears]] "doesn't want [her] kids back." [http://www.nypost.com/seven/02132008/news/nationalnews/brit_doesnt_want_her_kids__1st_ex_97425.htm]</ref>
* laws that apply to everyone else
* Commonly accepted behavioral boundaries and values of human decency
* hard work and humility

In addition, Hollywood portrays these values as rebellious and [[counterculture|countercultural]]. They portray religious and spiritual institutions as greedy, self-serving, sexually perverted, prejudiced, ignorant, and unscientific. When comparing the satisfaction brought about by faith, spirituality, family, and friendship, which may happen to include donations to a church or other organization, it is clear that the profits of Hollywood and the industries which rely upon Hollywood for profit are the true establishment - thus making traditional values truly rebellious and countercultural, and Hollywood values a lie.

==Deaths ==
Hollywood values are deadly. Tourists in Hollywood can visit over 30 sites of typically self-inflicted Hollywood celebrity deaths.<ref>http://www.hollywoodusa.co.uk/celebrity-death-sites.htm</ref> A sampling of deaths caused by Hollywood values include:<ref>http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=4174733&page=1</ref><ref>http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/entertainment/news/article/20021--list-of-celebrities-taken-by-drug-use-tragic-and-growing</ref>
*[[John Barrymore]], 60, cirrhosis of the liver from heavy drinking
*[[John Belushi]], 33, was a repeated drug abuser who ultimately died of a lethal injection of cocaine and heroin
*[[John Bonham]], 32, after too much drinking, asphyxiated on vomit
*[[Elisa Bridges]], 28, 'Playboy' magazine model, drug overdose combining heroin, methamphetamine and other drugs
*[[Joseph Brooks]], 73, Hollywood producer, composer, lyricist, and accused multiple rapist committed suicide.
*[[David Carradine]], 72, died from suffocation, most likely suicide, had history of suicidal thoughts, alcohol and narcotics abuse <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525177,00.html Thai Police: Carradine Death May Be Accidental Suffocation] Fox News, June 05, 2009 </ref>
*[[Stephen Clark]], 30, Def Leppard guitarist, drug and alcohol overdose<ref>http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1108020/bio</ref>
*[[Lana Clarkson]], 40, actress and model murdered by [[Phil Spector]]
*[[Kurt Cobain]], 27, lead singer from the band Nirvana, a heroin addict who committed suicide with a shotgun blast to the head.
*[[Ray Combs]], 40, host of the TV game show ''Family Feud'' committed suicide by hanging himself in a psychiatric ward.
*[[Jeff Conaway]], 60, film and television actor died from a suspected overdose. He struggled with addictions to cocaine and alcohol.
*[[John Costelloe]], 47, actor from HBO's ''The Sopranos'' known as "Johnny Cakes", shot himself in the head. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,472864,00.html 'Sopranos' Actor Shocks Fans, Loved Ones With Holiday Suicide] NYPost, December 25, 2008</ref>
*[[Bob Crane]],49, the actor's success led to a bizarre life of sex addiction. He was bludgeoned to death.
*[[Karl Dane]], 47, suicide by gunshot
*[[James Dean]], 24, a notoriously reckless and frequently ticketed driver crashed fatally head-on into a car turning left in front of his Porsche (see also crime, below)
*[[Kevin DuBrow]], 52, lead singer of 80's metal band Quiet Riot died from an overdose of cocaine.
*[[Ryan Dunn]], 34, [[MTV]]'s reality star from the series ''Jackass'', died in a 3:00 AM auto accident after a night of drinking. [http://www.tmz.com/2011/06/20/jackass-ryan-dunn-dies-dead-car-crash-accident-pennsylvania/]
*[[Eazy-E]], 31. [[AIDS]] contracted through drug use.
*[[Peg Entwistle]], 24, leaped to her death from atop the Hollywood sign.
*[[Brian Epstein]], 32, overdosed on sleeping pills and alcohol
*[[Chris Farley]], 33, overdose of morphine and cocaine
*[[Judy Garland]], 47, overdosed on sleeping pills
*[[Lucy Gordon]], 28, British actress from the movie ''Spiderman 3'', hung herself <ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Movies/wireStory?id=7642829 Actress Lucy Gordon Found Dead at Age 28 in Paris, ABC News, May 21, 2009]</ref>
*[[Paul Gray]], 38, bassist of heavy metal band Slipknot, died of an overdose of morphine and fentanyl. <ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100622/ap_on_en_mu/us_slipknot_bassist_autopsy</ref>
*[[Lee Grivas]], 26, the on-again, off-again boyfriend of actress Christina Applegate, 36, was found dead of an apparent drug overdose<ref>http://www.bloggernews.net/116552a</ref>
*Corey Haim, 38, teen idol who starred in many movies and then a reality show, died of a drug overdose.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8560246.stm</ref>
*[[Phil Hartman]], 49, murdered in his million-dollar house by his drug-addicted third wife Brynn Hartman
*[[Margaux Hemingway]], 42, suicide
*[[Jimi Hendrix]], 27, an enthusiastic abuser of illegal drugs, choked on his own vomit after overdose of sleeping pills.
*[[Rock Hudson]], 59, AIDS
*[[Michael Hutchence]], 37, asphyxiated during an auto-erotic act while alone in a Sydney hotel. His wife, Paula Yates (see below), also fell victim to Hollywood Values.
*[[Michael Jackson]], 51, cardiac arrest from a toxic mixture and abuse of prescription drugs, improperly prescribed by doctors.
*[[Richard Jeni]], 49, suicide<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258231,00.html</ref>
*[[Russell Tyrone Jones]] (a.k,a. "Old Dirty Bastard"), 35, musician, died of drug overdose two days before his 36th birthday
*[[Janis Joplin]], 27, heroin overdose
*[[Andrew Koenig]], 41, child actor in the TV series ''Growing Pains'', committed suicide.<ref>[http://omg.yahoo.com/news/andrew-koenigs-body-found-in-vancouver-park/36485?nc Andrew Koenig's Body Found in Vancouver Park, Yahoo News, February 25, 2010]</ref>
*[[Jani Lane]], 47, lead singer for the rock band Warrant was found dead in a hotel room. He had a history of alcohol abuse.<ref>[http://www.tmz.com/2011/08/11/warrant-singer-jani-lane-dead-dies-died-hotel-ventura-los-angeles-cherry-pie/ EX-WARRANT SINGER JANI LANE
DEAD AT 47, TMZ.com, August 11, 2011]</ref>
*[[Heath Ledger]], 28, found dead in his [[Manhattan]] apartment. "Ledger died of an accidental overdose of painkillers, sleeping pills, anti-anxiety medication and other prescription drugs, the New York City medical examiner said Wednesday." <ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,328828,00.html</ref>
*[[Bruce Lee]] (Li Xiaolong), actor, 33, collapsed and died; trace amounts of cannabis found in bloodstream at postmortem; the official cause of death was acute cerebral edema (swelling of the brain) from hypersensitivity to aspirin.
*[[Stuart Lubbock]], 31, found dead in the swimming pool of popular TV entertainer [[Michael Barrymore]], having suffered severe anal trauma, after a drug-fueled party at the star's home
*[[Queen (band)|Freddie Mercury]], 45, born Farrokh Bulsara, lead singer of the band Queen, died from AIDS-related bronchial pneumonia.
*[[Sal Mineo]], 37, murdered under circumstances that suggested "a homosexual motive".
*[[Marilyn Monroe]], 36, overdosed on sleeping pills.
*[[Keith Moon]], drummer of [[The Who]], 32, overdose of Clomethiazole prescribed to treat his [[alcoholism]].
*[[Jim Morrison]], 27, died of an apparent heroin overdose.
*[[Brittany Murphy]], 32, motion picture film actress died of cardiac arrest from combining prescription drugs <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/02/27/brittany-murphy-taken-vicodin-days/ Brittany Murphy May Have Taken 109 Vicodin in 11 Days, Fox News, February 27, 2010]</ref> Official death from pneumonia and drug intoxication.
*[[Chris Penn]], 40, brother of [[Sean Penn]], "died accidentally from an enlarged heart and the effects of a mix of multiple medications".
*[[River Phoenix]], 23, died from an overdose of cocaine and heroin.
*[[Dana Plato]], 34, ''Diff'rent Strokes'' star, suicide by drugs overdose after posing for lesbian pornography.
*[[Elvis Presley]], 42, large drug intake causes a cardiac arrhythmia, and rumored to have suffocated on the carpet when he collapsed from a drug overdose.
*[[Freddie Prinze]], 22, actor from ''Chico and the Man'', committed suicide by gunshot to the head.
*[[Richard Pryor]], 65, comedian with a history of smoking cocaine, died of a heart attack.
*[[Virginia Rappe]], 30, died of a ruptured bladder incurred at a party hosted by [[Roscoe Arbuckle]].
*[[Robert Reed]], 59, actor known as Mike Brady on ''The Brady Bunch'' was a homosexual with AIDS, died from cancer in 1992.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/entertainment/2009/08/14/brady-bunch?slide=25 Robert Reed in 1990, Fox News]</ref>
*[[Brad Renfro]], 25, became addicted to heroin and was found dead after a night of drinking
*[[George Reeves]], 45, played Superman from the series ''Adventures of Superman'', suicide by gunshot
*Rebecca Schaeffer, 21, actress in CBS's television series ''My Sister Sam'', stalked and murdered by a crazed fan.
*[[Jean Seberg]], 40, actress with clinic depression committed suicide by overdose of alcohol and barbiturates
*Michael Showers, 45, HBO actor found dead in the Mississippi River.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/08/25/treme-actor-michael-showers-body-found-in-mississippi-river/#ixzz1W3rKzHFr 'Treme' Actor Michael Showers' Body Found in Mississippi River, Fox News, August 25, 2011]</ref>
*[[Anna Nicole Smith]], 39, accidental overdose on prescription drugs
*[[Layne Staley]], 34, found dead in apartment two weeks after a drug overdose.<ref>http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/staley1.html</ref> Layne promoted the use of hard drugs in the 1992 [[Alice in Chains]] song "Junkhead"<ref>http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Junkhead-lyrics-Alice-In-Chains/3A665DABDFC00AD54825688F0010CD45</ref>
*[[Dorothy Stratten]], 20, murdered by spouse after engaging in extramarital affair
*[[David Strickland]], 29, cast member of NBC's ''Suddenly Susan'' hung himself in a Las Vegas hotel.
*[[Sharon Tate]], 26, an actress with a [[hippie]] lifestyle who was murdered by followers of [[Charles Manson]], a [[Beatles]]-obsessed musician wannabee; Manson's followers murdered Tate, who was pregnant and only two weeks from birth, her unborn child, her prior lover, who was staying with her while her husband, movie producer [[Roman Polanski]] (see 'Crime', below), was away, and another unmarried couple staying in the house. (It is believed that Manson had actually intended his followers to kill the home's previous residents, [[Terry Melcher]] (son of [[Doris Day]]) and [[Candice Bergen]].)<ref>The Polanski Problem [http://moviegeeksclub.blogspot.com/2008/04/polanski-problem.html]</ref> <ref>Sharon Tate Official Site: Sharon's Biography [http://www.sharontate.net/bio4.html]</ref>
*[[Lou Tellegen]], 52, a silent film and stage actor, suicide
*[[Lupe Velez]], 36, 1920s-1940s movie actress, suicide by an overdose of sleeping pills; she was pregnant and didn't want an illegitimate child.
*[[Sid Vicious]], 21. [[Heroin]] overdose while awaiting trial for his girlfriend's murder.
*[[Herve Villechaize]], 50, actor who played the character Tattoo on the hit show ''Fantasy Island'', committed suicide by self-inflicted gunshot.
*[[Kenneth Williams]], 62, comedian and actor, heart failure from interaction of pain medication and sleeping pills.
*[[Amy Winehouse]], 27, young singer with a life of substance abuse. Toxicology reports showed alcohol but no illegal drugs found in her system.<ref>[http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/amy-winehouse-was-drug-free-when-she-died-20110823 Amy Winehouse Toxicology Report Shows No Illegal Drugs] Perpetua, Matthew, August 23, 2011, ''The Rolling Stone'', retrieved August 25, 2011.</ref>
*[[Natalie Wood]], 43, actress, drowned while intoxicated.
*[[Paula Yates]], 41, television writer, heroin overdose. "Coroner Dr Paul Knapman told Westminster Coroners Court she had not committed suicide but said her behaviour had been "foolish and incautious". Her death was the result of "an unsophisticated taker of heroin" using drugs, he said. The court heard that 0.3mg of morphine per litre of blood was found in her body, which would not have been enough to kill her had she been a heroin addict."<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1013404.stm Heroin overdose killed Yate] November 8, 2000, BBCNews.com, retrieved August 25, 2011</ref>

==Sexually Transmitted Diseases==
The loose sexual morals characteristic of the lifestyle defined by Hollywood Values often lead to sexually transmitted diseases. Examples include,

* [[Rock Hudson]] died of AIDS-related complications after contracting the disease through homosexual intercourse.
* Michael Jeter, who was homosexual, also died due to AIDS-related complications.
* Freddie Mercury of the rock group [[Queen (band)|Queen]], notorious for his flamboyant onstage presence, also contracted AIDS through his wildly promiscuous homosexual lifestyle, and subsequently perished of the self-inflicted condition.

== Crime ==
'''Hollywood values often include being arrested or convicted for a variety of crimes. Here are some examples:'''

* [[Paris Hilton]] was convicted in 2007 of driving while intoxicated, and then violated the terms of her probation, leading to a 45-day prison sentence.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18472845/ Paris Hilton sentenced to 45 days in jail], MSNBC, May 4, 2007</ref> She was also arrested in Las Vegas on 8/27/2010 for possession of a controlled substance, [[Cocaine]]. The hotel heiress was a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped by police. The driver was arrested for DUI '''pertaining to drugs, not alcohol'''. Through further interaction between Hilton and authorities, it was discovered she was in possession of a controlled substance. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/08/28/paris-hilton-arrested-drug-possession/ Paris Hilton arrested in Las Vegas.]</ref> In order to avoid prison, Hilton pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors, and received a sentence of one year's probation, a fine, community service and also was ordered to complete a drug abuse program.
* Actress Lori Petty, who was featured in ''Free Willy'' and ''A League of their Own'', ran into a 14-year-old skateboarder and was arrested for felony drunk driving charges.<ref>http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7015343906</ref>
* Craig Phillip Robinson, the actor famous for playing Darryl Philbin on NBC's ''The Office'', "was arrested on June 29, 2008, on suspicion of possessing MDMA, also known as ecstasy, and methamphetamine."<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/TV/08/15/office.actor.arrested.ap/index.html</ref>
* [[Winona Ryder]] was convicted of vandalism and grand theft for stealing designer merchandise worth $5,560.40.<ref>http://www.courttv.com/trials/ryder/</ref>
* [[O.J. Simpson]] is widely believed to have murdered his wife and her friend, and was found liable in a civil (but not criminal) trial. He has since been convicted of unrelated felonies.
*[[Hugh Grant]] was arrested in 1995 when found in a car with a prostitute.<ref>[http://www.mugshots.org/hollywood/hugh-grant.html]</ref>
*[[Stacy Keach]], movie actor, was sentenced to 9 months imprisonment in the [[United Kingdom]] in 1984 after being arrested at [[London]] [[Heathrow Airport]] in possession of a large quantity of [[cocaine]].
*[[Kiefer Sutherland]], an actor starring in Fox television series ''24'' was given a 48-day sentence for DUI in 2007, an offense committed while still on probation following a 2004 conviction for DUI.<ref>Sutherland is released from jail [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7200633.stm BBC]</ref> He was also charged with misdemeanor assault for allegedly head-butting a fashion designer at a nightclub in 2009. <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=47880 ‘24’ Star Kiefer Sutherland Charged for Allegedly Head-Butting a Fashion Designer] Associated Press, May 8, 2009</ref>

*[[George Michael]] was convicted of "committing a lewd act in public", having been arrested in a public restroom by a plain clothes police officer. Arrested in September 2008 in a [[London]] public lavatory, he was found in possession of crack cocaine and cannabis - but merely received a caution. <ref>http://uk.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUKLL28201720080921</ref>
*[[Snoop Dogg]], a popular [[rap|rapper]], was arrested in 2006 for [[marijuana]] possession. He is a libertarian<ref>http://www.ucllibertarians.com/celebrities.html</ref> who advocates legal marijuana use.<ref>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/dailydish/detail?blogid=7&entry_id=21457</ref>
*[[Roman Polanski]], Polish-born film producer, is unable to return to Hollywood as he skipped bail and fled to [[France]] after being convicted in 1978 on charges of unlawful sexual intercourse with a thirteen-year old girl.
* Rapper DMX (Earl Simmons) was caught on camera drag racing at a speed over 110 miles on a freeway, and then a SWAT team was used to arrest him three days later on drug and animal cruelty charges. "The Maricopa County sheriff's office says the 37-year-old, whose real name is Earl Simmons, at first tried to barricade himself in his bedroom. He came out as a SWAT team entered during the early-morning raid Friday."<ref>http://news.aol.com/entertainment/music/music-news-story/ar/_a/dmx-arrested-on-animal-cruelty-charges/20080509163709990001</ref>
*[[Martha Stewart]] was charged with illegal [[insider trading]] in 2003.<ref>[http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2003-69.htm SEC press release (SEC Charges Martha Stewart, Broker Peter Bacanovic with Illegal Insider Trading)]</ref>
*[[Tatum O'Neal]] was arrested in 2008 for [[cocaine]] possession. <ref>
[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,361361,00.html Tatum O'Neal Released After Drug Arrest], [[Associated Press]], ''[[Fox News Channel|Fox News]]'', June 02, 2008.</ref>
*[[James Dean]] displayed an unhealthy interest in a twelve-year-old boy. His former director Elia Kazan later commented: "I've known many actors who have been twisted up in their sex lives, but never anybody as sick and unhealthy as Dean was."
*Redmond O'Neal, son of Farrah Fawcett and Ryan O'Neal, plead guilty to possessing heroin and methamphetamine as well as driving under the influence of drugs.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080627/ap_on_en_ot/people_redmond_o_neal;_ylt=AiQCBwpJpxqBOFWVyqEycXsDW7oF Redmond O'Neal pleads guilty to drug charges</ref>
*[[Actor]] Nick Nolte was arrested for drunk driving in 2002.<ref>http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/nolte1.html</ref>
*[[Sean Bean]] was arrested and spent the night in a cell after allegedly beating his wife.<ref>http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hR3pX0eEytJcMo7m5LRLHOYpasSA</ref>
*[[Shelley Malil]], 43, worked as an actor in [[movies]] and television. He is charged with causing great bodily injury and using a deadly weapon on Kendra Beebe, a 35-year-old [[mother]] of two. He appeared on the back patio of Kendra's house and stabbed her 20 times. Now held on a $10 million dollar bond. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Aug13/0,4670,ActorArrested,00.html 40-Year-Old Virgin' actor pleads not guilty] AP, August 13, 2008</ref>
*Former child actor [[Skylar Deleon]], who had a minor part in one episode of the ''Power Rangers'' series, was found guilty of three murders, including those of Tom and Jackie Hawks, who were allegedly bound to the anchor of their yacht and tossed overboard. <ref>[http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/21/local/me-deleon21 Deleon guilty of killing couple at sea
</ref> He was subsequently sentenced to death.<ref>http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=66850</ref>
*Musician George O'Dowd, better known by his stage name, [[Boy George]], was convicted for handcuffing a male escort to a bed against his will and then beating him with a chain.<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1092168/Guilty-Boy-George-warned-judge-faces-jail-falsely-imprisoning-male-escort.html</ref> He served 4 months of his 15-month sentence in jail, and then spent an additional 90 days on home detention with electronic surveillance. Earlier he had been convicted of cocaine possession.
*Dana Plato was arrested for armed robbery and prescription forgery.
*Todd Bridges assaulted a motorist and was repeatedly arrested for drug-related offenses.
*Gary Coleman was arrested for assaulting a woman by punching her in the face.
*Musician/Producer [[Phil Spector]] was found guilty of second-degree murder for the shooting death of actress Lana Clarkson. <ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30194936/</ref>
*Actor Elmore "Rip" Torn was arrested for breaking into a bank and carrying a firearm while intoxicated. In 2009, he was given probation in a drunk-driving case. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/01/30/actor-rip-torn-arrested-allegedly-breaking-connecticut-bank/?test=latestnews Actor Rip Torn Arrested for Allegedly Breaking Into Connecticut Bank, Fox News, January 30, 2010]</ref>
*Former teen actor Leif Garrett was arrested for possession of a controlled substance. He has a number of former arrests including [[heroin]] possession. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/03/crimesider/entry6170622.shtml Leif Garrett Arrested: Former Teen Idol Busted for Controlled Substance, CBS News, February 3, 2010]</ref>
*[[Sean Penn]] was charged with criminal battery and vandalism for attacking the paparazzi in October 2009. <ref>[http://www.tmz.com/2010/02/19/sean-penn-crime-battery-vandalism-prosecution-jail-paparazzi/ Sean Penn Charged With Crimes, TMZ, February 19, 2010]</ref>
*Comedian [[Andy Dick]] was arrested for groping an employee and a patron of a nightclub in West Virginia. <ref>[http://www.herald-dispatch.com/breaking/x818845820/Andy-Dick-arrested-by-HPD Andy Dick charged with felony, shows still on, Herald Dispatch, January 23, 2010]</ref>
*Actor Nicholas Brendon from ''Buffy the Vampire Slayer'' and ''Criminal Minds'' was arrested March 2010 in a drunken scuffle with police. He was charged with resisting arrest, two counts of battery against a police officer and felony vandalism. Brendon has a history of alcoholism.<ref>[http://www.popeater.com/2010/04/07/nicholas-brendon-arrested-charged/ 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' Star Charged With Police Battery, Vandalism, PopEater.com, April 7, 2010]</ref>
*Hollywood television producer Bruce Beresford-Redman of CBS's ''Survivor'' series was arrested as the lead suspect in the murder of his wife. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/04/08/mexican-official-hollywood-tv-producer-suspect-wifes-death/?test=latestnews 'Survivor' Producer 'Suspected' in Wife's Death in Mexico, FOX News, April 8, 2010]</ref>
*Actor Chris Klein, star of the ''American Pie'' films, which glorify sex and alcohol abuse, was arrested for drunk driving in June 2010<ref>http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/16/american-pie-chris-klein-busted-for-dui-arrest/</ref>
*Actor Michael Brea played roles in ''Ugly Betty'' and ''Step Up 3D'', killed his 55-year old mother with a sword while yelling Bible verses. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/24/ugly-betty-actor-allegedly-kills-mother-foot-sword-screaming-repent/ 'Ugly Betty' Actor Allegedly Kills Mother With 3-Foot Sword While Screaming 'Repent', FOX News, November 24, 2010]</ref>
*TV host and actor Gary Collins was arrested and charged with a felony for allegedly leaving a restaurant without paying his $59.35 tab. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/01/05/tv-host-gary-collins-arrested-skipping-restaurant/ TV Host Gary Collins Arrested for Skipping Out on $59 Restaurant Bill, FOXNews, January 5, 2011]</ref>
*Actress Jaime Pressly was arrested for driving under the influence. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/01/11/jaime-pressly-wasted-dui-arrest/ Jaime Pressly Blew Nearly Three Times Legal Limit on Breathalyzer Before Arrest, Fox News, January 11, 2011 ]</ref>
*Korey Rowe, producer of the 9/11 conspiracy film ''Loose Change'', was arrested for selling heroin.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/31/conspiracy-film-producer-arrested-drug-charges/?test=latestnews 9/11 Conspiracy Film Producer Arrested on Drug Charges, Fox News, January 31, 2011]</ref>
*Lindsay Lohan is facing felony grand theft charges; she was accused of stealing a $2500 necklace from a Venice boutique.<ref>[ttp://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/02/05/lindsay-lohan-facing-years-state-prison-jewelry-theft Lindsay Lohan Facing Three Years in State Prison, Fox News, February 5, 2011]</ref>
*Christina Aguilera was arrested under the misdemeanor charge of public intoxication.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/03/01/christina-aguilera-arrested-public-intoxication-report-says/?test=faces Christina Aguilera Arrested for Public Intoxication, Fox News, March 1, 2011]</ref>
*Actor Tom Sizemore was arrested on an outstanding warrant for battery. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/09/20/actor-tom-sizemore-arrested-on-outstanding-battery-warrant-report-says/#ixzz1YVp32AsJ Actor Tom Sizemore Arrested, Fox News, September 20, 2011]</ref>
*Canadian filmmaker Roger Avery, who had collaborated with Quentin Tarantino in the past, was convicted of drunk driving and vehicular manslaughter in August 2009.<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/film/story/2009/08/21/avary-plea.html Pulp Fiction writer pleads guilty over deadly car crash - CBC0]</ref>

== Falsehoods ==
''See also: [[Essay:Worst Liberal Movies]]''

[[Hollywood values]] perpetuate [[liberal]]-driven [[Essay:Liberal Falsehoods|falsehoods]]:

*[[Inside Job]]
:A 2010 film by Democrat donor Charles Ferguson that blames the Great Recession on [[Wall Street]], deregulation, the [[Bush Administration]]. The film whitewashes Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's role and claims the financial system corrupted politics. Capitalists are the bad guys.
*[[Fair Game]]
:Another Bush bash flick starring communist [[Sean Penn]]. 2010 film rehashes the lead up to the war in Iraq and [[Valerie Plame]]'s role. Typical un-American Hollywood film ''"The narrative that [[Karl Rove]] and Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff [[Scooter Libby]] were nefarious behind-the-scenes players intent on destroying innocent reputations while pushing the nation into war on false pretenses."'' <ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/10/hollywood-hit-job-fair-game-propagates-easily-disprovable-myths-about-lead-up-to-iraq-war/ Hollywood hit job: ‘Fair Game’ propagates easily disprovable myths about lead up to Iraq War http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/10/hollywood-hit-job-fair-game-propagates-easily-disprovable-myths-about-lead-up-to-iraq-war The Daily Caller, November 11, 2010]</ref>
*[[The Iron Lady]]
: Meryl Streep plays [[Margaret Thatcher]] in this gross mistake of a film. Liberals distort her triumphs and her low career points. Streep portrays Thatcher as a dementia-sufferer looking back at her life with sadness. The director defended the film as "a fictional film but it will be fair and accurate.” Thatcher's children Mark and Carol are appalled and say “They think it sounds like some Left-wing fantasy." <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/7895160/Margaret-Thatchers-family-are-appalled-at-Meryl-Streep-film.html Margaret Thatcher's family are 'appalled' at Meryl Streep film, Telegraphe.co.uk, July 17, 2010]</ref>

*[[The Tillman Story]]
:A liberals view of the circumstances surrounding the death of football star and Army Ranger [[Pat Tillman]]. The film portrays each and every fact as sinister. Plus, each and every fact is evidence of a conspiracy. Typical Hollywood [[George W. Bush]] bashing flick. The bias was clear, make Tillman a liberal atheist anti-war hero that was cannon-fodder for the government. Tillman's actions speak louder than any twisted accusations presented in this documentary. <ref>[http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/kschlichter/2010/07/13/the-tillman-story-dont-let-the-facts-get-in-the-way-of-your-agenda/ FILM REVIEW: Absurd Conspiracy Theories Abound in Agenda-Driven ‘Tillman Story’, BigHollywood.com]</ref>

*[[Matthew Shepard Fallacy]]
:Adherents to Hollywood values "green-lighted a troika of [[Matthew Shepard]] movies after he was senselessly killed because it affirmed their gut feeling that a gay young man living in backward America is destined for death at the hands of hateful ultraconservatives. A street in West Hollywood still stands in his name despite ABC News reporting the story false: He was killed by crazed meth addicts for drugs and money -- not because he was gay. Isn't that tragic enough? Yet Shepard is still the icon of gay victims' rights, and the mistaken story of his 'fate' soon thereafter befell Jake Gyllenhaal's character in 'Brokeback Mountain.' The Oscar statuette stands as the exclamation point."<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-dustup26sep26,0,1800794,full.story</ref>

*[[Inherit the Wind]]
:Hollywood perpetuated complete lies about the [[Scopes Trial]] in order to smear Christianity, including:

:*portraying [[William Jennings Bryan]] as being ignorant, harsh and punitive, based on a false portrayal of his actions and testimony

:*falsely claiming that at the end Bryan, in a senseless fit of madness, died in the courtroom amid caring and reasonable Darwinists

:*falsely portraying the Darwinists in a positive light and the Christians as deceitful

:In real life, Bryan and the Christians won the trial and were charitable to the end, while the Darwinist Darrow was deceitful in reneging on his deal to take the witness stand after Bryan did.

*[[U 571]]
:The 2000 film [[U 571]] had a plot which was based on the first capture of a German Enigma machine in [[World War 2]]. However, in the film the capture is made by Americans. In fact the first Enigma machine was captured by the British in 1941 prior to the Americans entering the war.

*[[Better This World]]
:2011 documentary "feature length lie" is a [[PBS]] film regarding the thwarted domestic terrorist attack at the 2008 [[Republican]] National Convention and [[liberal]]s attempt to re-write history. <ref>[http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hgiles/2011/04/04/better-this-world-another-chapter-in-hollywoods-love-affair-with-terrorists/ ‘Better This World’: Another Chapter in Hollywood’s Love Affair With Terrorists]</ref>

*[[Recount-film]]
:The 2008 [[HBO]] movie on the 2000 Presidential elections and its aftermath in Florida. A look into how the [[Republicans]] stole the election and the role of its party members that made it happen. Republicans are portrayed as ghoulish and cited as manufacturing demonstrations. Both the real Warren Christopher and James Baker contend the film’s portrayal of the former is hopelessly untrue. <ref>[http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/hbos-recount-hanging-chads-and-black-humor/ HBO’s Recount: Hanging Chads, Black Humor] The Washington Times, May 4, 2008</ref>

*[[Winter Soldiers]]
:The 1972 film about U.S. troops from Vietnam put on record as baby killers, human rights violators, and general disservice to America. This myth was propagated by a few anti-war activist liberal actors that never did see combat in [[Vietnam]] and some were never in the country. The initial result was to hold hearings in Congress over the matter. All allegations were proven fabrications, falsehoods, and lies.

*[[An Inconvenient Truth]]
:The 2006 false documentary about man-made [[global warming]] created & hyped by [[Al Gore]]. A [[British]] court found the film contained at least [http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming#Al_Gore.27s_.22Inconvenient_Truth.22_Movie_Claims 11 material falsehoods]. The Science and Public Policy Institute has found 35 falsehoods associated with the film. <ref>[http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html 35 Inconvenient Truths, Science and Public Policy Institute]</ref>

*[[Fahrenheit 911]]
:A [[Michael Moore]] film that was a false portrayal of why America fought a war against [[Saddam Hussein]]'s Iraq. The main theme was to attack [[George W. Bush]] during wartime.

*[[Sicko]]
:Another [[Michael Moore]] film which spread many falsehoods about American healthcare while unduly glorifying the so-called benefits of socialized healthcare. Memorably referred to Cuban healthcare as being better than American healthcare.

*[[Redacted]]
:Brian De Palma’s 2007 fictional anti-Iraq War film funded by [[Mark Cuban]]. The film is credited with inspiring a terrorist attack that killed two U.S. servicemen in [[Germany]]. <ref>[http://weaselzippers.us/2011/03/11/confirmed-german-authorities-say-de-palmas-anti-military-movie-redacted-motivated-frankfurt-jihadi-to-murder-american-airmen/ Confirmed: German Authorities Say De Palma’s Anti-Military Movie “Redacted” Motivated Frankfurt Jihadi to Murder American Airmen, March 11, 2011]</ref>

==Disrespect for marriage==

Many celebrities and other exponents of Hollywood Values have no respect for the sanctity of marriage - their own or anyone else's. This is manifested in a high rate of marriage breakdown, and by the home-wrecking activities of the promiscuous, whose moral outlooks have been distorted by Liberal and atheistic teachings.

*[[Elizabeth Taylor]] has been married eight (8) times, including a nearly 6-year marriage to [[John Warner|Senator John Warner]] (R-VA).<ref>http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000072/bio</ref>
*[[Valerie Bertinelli]] said her divorce from [[Eddie Van Halen]] was caused by infidelity and drug use - by her too. She said she was "destroying my body," trying to keep up with a rock-star lifestyle. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332551,00.html Valerie Bertinelli About Divorce From Eddie Van Halen: 'I Wasn't An Angel Either'], [[Fox News Channel]], ''[[Associated Press]]'', February 26, 2008</ref>
*[[Zsa Zsa Gabor]] has been married nine (9) times. One of her marriages - to Felipe de Alba - was annulled after one day.
*[[Mickey Rooney]] has been married eight (8) times, but has been with his last wife for 30 years after embracing religion and abandoning his previous lifestyle.
*[[Charlie Chaplin]] married four (4) times, including his marriage at the age of 54 to an 18-year-old bride.
*[[Johnny Carson]] married four (4) times, and frequently made light of his having divorced three times, as if this were something funny.
*[[Meredith Baxter]] married and divorced four (4) times; she finally admitted in 2009 that she was a [[homosexual]].
*In 2009, the married [[David Letterman]] admitted to having had adulterous sexual relationships with multiple members of his staff; he had previously fathered a child out of wedlock.
*[[Jayne Mansfield]] was married three times and had numerous extramarital affairs. She appeared in the centerfold of the pornographic magazine Playboy, and died in an automobile accident.
*[[Britney Spears]]' 2004 marriage to Jason Alexander lasted 55 hours.
*Musicians [[Cher]] and [[Gregg Allman]] were married for eight days in 1975.
*[[Drew Barrymore]] has two of the shortest celebrity marriages on record, one of 30 days and a five-month marriage to notorious lowbrow comedian Tom Green. Barrymore is a poster child for Hollywood values, as a former child star who became an alcoholic and drug addict who also posed for pornographic magazines.
*[[Arnold Schwarzenegger]], made public that he had an adulterous relationship and fathered a child with another women.
*[[Halle Berry]], a fanatic supporter of [[Barack Hussein Obama]]<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8605.html Obamamania verges on obsession - Politico]</ref>, had been married two times in the past and gave birth out of wedlock.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/08/21/celebrities-kids-wedlock/ Celebrities Who Had Kids Out of Wedlock - Fox News]</ref> Later on, Berry and her baby's father Gabriel Aubry had split and a custody battle between the two ensued.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/halle-berrys-latest-blunder-gabriel-aubry/story?id=12813387 Gabriel Aubry: Another Bad Apple for Halle Berry? - ABC News]</ref>
*[[Eddie Murphy]] impregnated former Spice Girl Melanie Brown without marrying her<ref>[http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20043487,00.html Mel B: DNA Proves Eddie Murphy Fathered Her Baby - People Magazine]</ref> and later on severed all contact with Melanie and their shared daughter.<ref>[http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a101281/mel-b-writes-song-about-eddie-murphy.html Mel B writes song about Eddie Murphy - Digital Spy]</ref>
*[[Kim Kardashian]] and [[NBA]] player [[Kris Humphries]] got divorced after 72 days.<ref>[http://articles.philly.com/2011-11-01/news/30346165_1_kris-humphries-kim-and-kris-kim-kardashian#ixzz1cVCWcXKK Sideshow: Smash go Kim and Kris - The Philadelphia Inquirer]</ref>

== Offensive Behavior/Moral depravity ==

* [[Charlie Sheen]] to Wife Brooke Mueller: "I'll Kill You." <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/08/09/charlie-sheen-wife-brook-mueller-ill-kill-you/?test=latestnews Charlie Sheen to Wife Brooke Mueller: "I'll Kill You"]</ref>. Sheen was arrested on Christmas Day for domestic abuse of his current wife Brooke. He was booked for second-degree assault, menacing, and criminal mischief. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/12/25/actor-charlie-sheen-arrested-domestic-violence-charges/?test=faces Actor Charlie Sheen Released From Jail After Domestic Abuse Arrest, Fox News, December 25, 2009]</ref> Sheen has a history that includes assaults against girlfriends and his former wife. He is also infamous for drug/alcohol abuse, having tried (and failed) numerous attempts in rehab clinics. He was fired from the sitcom Two and A Half Men where, in true Hollywood hypocrisy, he played an "amusingly" alcohol-abusing ladies' man, except the lifestyle proves consequence-free. Sheen has become dangerously unhinged in recent weeks and has been making increasingly bizarre rants online. No one from Hollywood has yet to step in.
* Trashing hotel rooms is a favorite form of offensive behavior by Hollywood types. Many examples are readily available on the [[internet]].<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.budgettravel.com/bt-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101034.html]</ref>
*[[Mel Gibson]], who had started drinking again, was arrested after being stopped for driving at 84 mph in a 45 mph zone on a notoriously dangerous road in Malibu, California.<ref>''Mel Gibson apologizes after DUI arrest'' [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14080210/ Associated Press]</ref> A breathalyzer test confirmed he was drunk and next to him was an open bottle of Tequila; after being arrested he hurled Anti-Semitic abuse at a Jewish police officer.<ref>[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2292336,00.html Mel Gibson rants against Jews in drink-drive arrest], Times Online, July 30, 2006</ref>
*The parents of [[Miley Cyrus]], just 15 years old, allowed [[Annie Liebowitz]] to pose the starlet without a shirt or bra (nominally [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/topless "topless"]) and with just a sheet covering her front for Vanity Fair magazine.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/business/media/28hannah.html?_r=1&oref=slogin</ref><ref>http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20195785,00.html</ref><ref>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23608789-5001026,00.html</ref> "I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be 'artistic' and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed," Cyrus said Sunday in a statement through her publicist. "I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about." <ref>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gYLnT2kyPIgNUurQ71aNM3EJKpRAD90ARTGO0</ref>
:"... a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines," a network statement said. <ref>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gYLnT2kyPIgNUurQ71aNM3EJKpRAD90ARTGO0</ref>
*Many Hollywood stars who have purposely sought fame have then turned upon photographers and fans. [[Sean Penn]] is well known to lash out at photographers.
*The parents of 16-year old Jamie Lynn Spears allowing her unwed pregnancy to be publicly portrayed as a normal act even though she is a role model for millions of underage teenagers. Mayor of Gloucester, Carolyn Kirk recently blamed the glamorizing of teen pregnancy by Jamie Lynn Spears for the 17 high school teenagers that got pregnant at the same time. <ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2008/06/gloucester_mayo.html Gloucester mayor rebuts report of teen pregnancy pact], June 23, 2008</ref>
*[[Ellen DeGeneres]] proudly displays her [[gay]] sexuality for all to see. On August 16, 2008, DeGeneres married Portia de Rossi in a small ceremony in Beverly Hills. Fox News called it "the biggest celebrity union since California legalized same-sex marriage." <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,405085,00.html Reports: Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi Wed] AP, August 17, 2008</ref> Now, her fans and millions of young girls can read about her gay marriage in magazines such as People and Us Magazine, hear about it on celebrity news television shows.
*Rapper [[Kanye West]] and bodyguard attacked the paparazzi at [[LAX]] airport and allegedly smashed a camera on the floor valued at $10,000. The pair were arrested for felony vandalism. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,420869,00.html Kanye West Arrested in Altercation With Paparazzi] Ap, September 11, 2008</ref>
*[[Heather Locklear]] was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of a controlled substance. The officer noticed Locklear's car parked on a state highway and blocking a lane in Montecito, Ca. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,429388,00.html Heather Locklear Arrested on Suspicion of DUI] AP, September 29, 2008</ref>
*Celebrity of the moment [[Kourtney Kardashian]] gave a risque lingerie shoot while pregnant with her boyfriend's child. After birth, Mom and baby adorned magazine covers, highlighting the modern acceptance of single motherhood. The cover reads ''"Baby Mason will bring our family together,"'' obscuring the traditional meaning of family. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/entertainment/2009/10/16/kardashian-sisters?slide=2 The Kardashian Family, Fox News]</ref>
*Actor [[Jude Law]] had a sexual relationship with model Samantha Burke that produced a daughter. It is reported that Law finally went to visit his daughter for the first time, 5 months after she was born. <ref>[http://www.celebrity-gossip.net/celebrities/hollywood/jude-law-makes-first-visit-to-love-child-216056/ Jude Law Makes First Visit To Love Child, CelebrityGossip.net, March 1, 2010]</ref>
*Actor [[Tom Hanks]] called Mormons 'un-American' for their support of Proposition 8 in California. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/01/23/tom-hanks-apologizes-calling-mormon-supporters-proposition-american/ Tom Hanks Apologizes for Calling Mormon Supporters of Proposition 8 'Un-American', Fox News, January 23, 2009]</ref>
*[[Woody Allen]] seduced and took pornographic photographs of the youthful daughter of his then girlfriend [[Mia Farrow]].
*[[John Cusack]] calls for satanic death cult to descend on Fox News, Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich and GOP welfare freaks. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/08/31/actor-john-cusack-calls-satanic-death-fox-news-gop-leaders/?test=faces John Cusack Calls for 'Satanic Death' of Fox News, GOP Leaders, FOXNews, August 31, 2010]</ref>
*[[Brad Pitt]], appearing in a Spike Lee film announces his desire to see BP executives get the death penalty. <ref>[http://www.politico.com/click/stories/1008/pitt_death_penalty_for_bp.html Brad Pitt: Death Penalty For BP, Politico, August 23, 2010]</ref> Pitt also admitted to having a history of drug use, and while he claims it belongs in his past [[Quentin Tarantino]] has said otherwise.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1207391/Brad-Pitt-offered-drugs-reveals-Quentin-Tarantino-actor-claims-quit-cannabis-years-ago.html 'Brad Pitt offered me drugs,' reveals Quentin Tarantino after actor claims he quit cannabis years ago - Daily Mail]</ref>
*[[Tracy Morgan]] made lewd comments about [[Sarah Palin]].<ref>[http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/01/tnt_apologizes_for_tracy_morga.html TNT Apologizes for Tracy Morgan’s Sarah Palin Comment - New York Magazine]</ref>
*[[Keith Richards]], guitarist of the [[Rolling Stones]], has said that he snorted his father's ashes.<ref>[http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/17933669/ns/today-entertainment/t/keith-richards-says-he-snorted-fathers-ashes/#.TrAYI3L4JJE Keith Richards says he snorted father's ashes - MSNBC]</ref>
*During one of his performances, [[Michael Richards]] lashed at a member of the audience with racial slurs.<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/tv/story/2006/11/20/kramer-racial-slurs.html Richards 'deeply, deeply sorry' for racial slurs - CBC]</ref>
=== Hollywood actor Dan Akroyd on bestiality ===

''See also:'' [[Liberalism and bestiality]]

On September 16, 2008 LifeSiteNews quotes Catholic League President Bill Donohue saying:
{{cquote|...Dan Akroyd...says there’s no such thing as sexual morality, even to the point of saying that a man having sex with a dog or a cat would be perfectly fine by him provided that the cat or dog could be sentient and could make a decision.<ref>[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/sep/08091610 In New Book Actor Dan Akroyd Says he Would Support Bestiality if Animals Were Sentient]</ref>}}

== Hollywood "humor" ==
Another manifestation of Hollywood's offensiveness and moral depravity is found in many of its "comedy" movies. More so than any other entertainment industry, many Hollywood productions rely on lowbrow, juvenile humor. Unlike more intelligent comedies of the early to mid-20th century (such as ''The Great Dictator'' or ''Arsenic and Old Lace''), many contemporary Hollywood comedies eschew intelligence, social commentary, wit or satire in favor of lower-hanging fruit, such as "toilet humor," nudity/sex, gratuitous violence and shock value. Examples of such films include:

*''American Pie'' - a long-running film franchise primarily dealing with teenage sex and alcohol; it relies on jokes about sex and bodily functions
*''Jackass'' - essentially a montage of ridiculous stunts and pranks with no coherent story
*''South Park'' - uses constant iterations of urine, feces, farting and shock humor, such as jokes about abortion, rape and the Holocaust
*''There's Something About Mary'' - contains gratuitous sex and jokes about bodily functions
*''Family Guy'' - notorious for its shock tactics, this show routinely employs willful tastelessness for comedic shock value. Examples include one regular character who is a pedophile, as well as constant Hitler jokes

== Rehabilitation clinics ==
Hollywood values often result in [[Celebrity|celebrities]] going into rehabilitation clinics. Here are some examples:

*[[Kirsten Dunst]] checked into the [[Cirque Lodge]] treatment facility in [[Utah]] after a week of hard partying at the [[Sundance Film Festival]], according to a source at the lodge, although the lodge's director of operations denies this. <ref name = "foxkirsten">
[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329545,00.html Reports Say Kirsten Dunst in Rehab; Rep for Facility Denies It], ''[[Fox News]]'', February 08, 2008</ref>

The following all checked into the above facility seeking treatment for various psychological problems:

*[[Lindsay Lohan]]<ref name = "foxkirsten"/>
*[[Eva Mendes]]<ref name = "foxkirsten"/>
*[[Mary-Kate Olsen]]<ref name = "foxkirsten"/>
*[[Robert Downey Jr.]]
*[[Courtney Love]]

*[[Heather Locklear]]<ref>"A spokeswoman for the 47-year-old star said: 'Heather has been dealing with anxiety and depression.'" She "checked into a clinic in [[Arizona]] that treats depression."[http://www.pnas.org/content/101/11/3721.full]</ref>

*[[David Arquette]], enters rehab for for treatment of alcohol abuse and depression. <ref>[http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2011/01/david-arquette-rehab-alcohol-courteney-cox-arquette.html David Arquette enters rehab; Courteney Cox supportive, L.A. Times, January 3, 2011]</ref>

*[[David Duchovny]], having boosted Hollywood Values through his role in a decadent television series, now finds himself trapped by the depravity that he promoted, and has had to enter rehab for his addiction to unchastity<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSN2835847820080829</ref>.

== Hypocrisy ==

Hollywood personalities often propose legislation such as outlawing private gun ownership, or speak out against things such as anti-gun laws, but have at the same time acted in movies contrary to their public opinions:

* [[George Clooney]] on hearing that fellow actor and gun-rights advocate, [[Charlton Heston]], suffers from Alzheimer's disease, said: ''"I don't care. Charlton Heston is the head of the [[National Rifle Association]]. He deserves whatever anyone says about him."''<ref>http://www.funnyreign.com/quotes-georgeclooney.shtml</ref> Clooney starred in the film ''The Peacemaker'', in which he played an American military man defending the country from a nuclear attack; scenes in the film showed him using a gun to defend himself and others.

* [[Mark Wahlberg]] upon meeting Charlton Heston on the set of the remake of ''Planet of the Apes'', Wahlberg rudely told Heston, "It was very disturbing meeting you." Later, Wahlberg would have this to say at the MTV Movie Awards: ''"I believe Charlton Heston is America's best villain because he loves guns so much. Maybe he should get the award for being president of the National Rifle Association."''<ref>http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2360</ref> Wahlberg's character in ''Planet of the Apes'' uses a gun to defend himself and other humans from the apes who would rule over them.

* [[Helen Mirren]] played Queen Elizabeth II in a movie 'The Queen', but [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,414361,00.html admits she used to use cocaine] as a result of her poor life choices as a younger woman.

==Using appearances to promote their [[liberal]] political views==
*Rapper Kanye West infamously went way off script during a live benefit concert for victims of Hurricane Katrina, criticizing the media's treatment of images of black and white people and saying President [[George W. Bush]] "doesn't care about black people."<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090300165.html</ref>
*During the live broadcast of the 2007 Emmy Awards, actress Sally Field went on a sputtering anti-war rant, eventually concluding by saying, "If the mothers ruled the world, there would be no g**d*** war in the first place." She received thunderous applause from the Hollywood audience for her vulgar remark.<ref>http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=3610891</ref>
*[[Michael Moore]] surprised no one by criticizing President Bush during his 2003 Oscar acceptance speech for "Bowling for Columbine," saying, "We live in the time where we have fictitious election results that elect a fictitious president. We live in a time where we have a man who's sending us to war for fictitious reasons, whether it's the fiction of duct tape or the fiction of orange alerts. We are against this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush. Shame on you."<ref>http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/20030323-2028-oscars-moore.html</ref>
*Actress Jessica Lange verbally attacked President Bush and the Iraq War during a 2008 commencement speech at Sarah Lawrence College in Yonkers, New York, stating, "We are living in an America that, in the last seven and a half years, has waged an unnecessary war, established prison camps, condoned torture, employed corporate armies, eliminated the right of habeas corpus, practiced extraordinary rendition, and believe me, this is only a partial list."<ref>http://cbs5.com/politics/Jessica.Lange.President.2.732264.html</ref>
*Actress Megan Fox was recently quoted by MSN in a piece entitled "The Wit and Wisdom of Megan Fox" discussing her new movie Transformers 2. She said "why not just take out all of the white trash, hillbilly, anti-gay, super Bible-beating people in Middle America?” <ref>[http://www.onenewsnow.com/Blog/Default.aspx?id=559876 Megan Fox would barter using ‘Bible-beating white trash’]OneNewsNow.com</ref>

==Vanity and [[Idol]] Worship==
[[Hollywood]] places a value on appearance and it is driven into the minds of those who they seek profits and adulation from. There is such a need to be rich and famous that anything goes. It may be glamorizing to reveal skin <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/entertainment/2009/07/15/lovely-talented-khloe-kardashian?test=faces The youngest of the Kardashian gals decided flashing photographers was the best way to get some attention, FOX News, April 1, 2010]</ref> or shamelessly being sex symbols to audiences. Pat-your-back awards ceremonies whereby we breathlessly await the ''Stars'' to arrive. Naturally, scandals make big headlines and these people are no stranger to controversy, for [[money]]. These fake [[Gods]] have captured the hearts of millions upon millions who follow their every move. Negative stereotypes poison the minds of their followers. Women feel less worthy due to the overwhelming influence touching every part of society. [[Pennsylvania State University|Penn State's]] Media Research found the following regarding Women's magazines, "Past research indicates that exposure to thin models results in lower [[self-esteem]] and decreased weight satisfaction, and to increased depression, guilt, shame, [[stress]], insecurity and body dissatisfaction." <ref>[http://www.psu.edu/dept/medialab/research/selfworth.html Construction of Beauty as a Measure of Self-Worth] Penn State Media Research</ref>

[[File:Celebrity.jpg|right|250px]]

==Award Shows==
Fans of Hollywood are served copious amounts of vanity and glamour as celebrities are greeted on the red-carpet attending award events. Paparazzi snap pictures and the stars are rated for their appearance in various tabloids and entertainment television. Once the celebrities have arrived at the awards, television cameras capture for the masses acceptance speeches of their beloved stars. Once limited to couple of banquets such as the [[Emmy Award|Emmys]] or [[Golden Globe]]s, now some two-dozen award shows are vying for exposure. These new award shows offer glimpses into ego and moral depravity of Hollywood. It's not uncommon for the stars to act cool by cussing to the audience during acceptance speeches. These awards shows have become tawdry events that are marketed mostly to teens.

*Madonna engages in a lustful lesbian kiss onstage to [[Britney Spears]] at the 2003 MTV Music Video Awards. <ref>[http://top40.about.com/od/britneyspears/ig/Britney-Spears-Photo-Biography/Britney-Spears-Kissing-Madonna.htm Britney Spears and Madonna Kiss, About.com, 2003]</ref>
*A notoriously self-serving [[Kanye West]] jumped onstage at the [[MTV Video Awards]] to interrupt an acceptance speech by [[Taylor Swift]]. <ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-15972-Raleigh-Pop-Culture-Examiner~y2009m9d14-MTV-Video-Music-Awards-inspire-annual-controversy MTV Video Music Awards inspire annual controversy, Examiner.com, September 14, 2009]</ref>
*[[Mariah Carey]] attended the Palm Springs International Film Festival. Her acceptance speech was made while completely drunk. <ref>[http://neonlimelight.com/2010/01/06/video-mariah-carey-accepts-film-festival-award-drunk/ Video: Mariah Carey Accepts Film Festival Award Drunk, Neonlimelight.com, January 6, 2010]</ref>
*[[Miley Cyrus]] performed at the Teen Choice Awards in August 2009. The 16-year old was dancing around on a stripper pole. <ref>[http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1619183/20090820/cyrus__miley.jhtml Billy Ray Cyrus Defends Miley's Teen Choice Pole Dance, MTV.com, August 20, 2009]</ref>
*Actor [[Jack Black]] opened the 2009 MTV Video Awards by leading everyone in a prayer to [[satan]]. <ref>[http://christianpress.com/content/entertainment/11-lifestyle/360-jack-black-leads-a-prayer-to-the-devil-at-the-2009-mtv-awards satan Jack Black Leads A Prayer To The Devil At The 2009 MTV Awards, Christian Press, September 14, 2009 ]</ref>
*Adam Lambert’s [[American Music Awards]] performance received over 1500 complaints for flipping off the audience, kissing a male keyboard player, and fondling several of his backup dancers. <ref>[http://www.ecanadanow.com/entertainment/2009/11/28/did-you-find-adam-lamberts-american-music-awards-performance-offensive/comment-page-1/ Did You Find Adam Lambert’s American Music Awards Performance Offensive?, eCanadanow.com, November 28, 2009]</ref>
*Nominees for the 13th annual 2011 [[Teen Choice Awards]] include a lesbian kiss, a masturbating dog, a pot head middle school teacher. ''"Teens will vote for their favorites, ranging from artists with hits about S&M, to sex and drug-filled R-rated comedies, to favorite “break up” songs – one nominated song features the “f” word 16 times."'' <ref>[http://m.newsbusters.org/blogs/erin-r-brown/2011/08/05/producers-pick-lesbian-kiss-r-rated-movies-teen-choice-award-nominees Producers Pick Lesbian Kiss, R-Rated Movies as Teen Choice Award Nominees, Newsbusters.org, August 5, 2011]</ref>

==Preying on Underage Stars==

Very many child actors and actresses have gone on to have damaged and tragically short lives as a result of early exposure to Hollywood Values.

Debbie Gibson reflects on her life as a sixteen-year-old teenage Pop star and her exposure to the very sinister side of show business. “It is very disheartening that there are so many older men that prey on young performers.” What is even more disturbing than dirty male fans would be older male record executives trying to take her to adult parties and corrupt her with alcohol. Even the way the paparazzi stalk the younger artists is very different from following around adults. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,533542,00.html?test=faces Debbie Gibson Speaks Out About Pedophile Fans Wanting to 'Corrupt Little Girls' Fox News, July 17, 2009]</ref>

Former child-actor Corey Feldman tells ABC that a big group of Hollywood executives are responsible for pedophilia and rape of underage stars. <ref>[http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/aprice/2011/08/16/child-molestation-allegations-against-hollywood-must-be-investigated/ Child Molestation Allegations Against Hollywood Must Be Investigated]</ref> Feldman blames the death of troubled teen actor Corey Haim on Haim's Hollywood agent who molested him at age 14. <ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2025357/Paedophilia-Hollywoods-biggest-problem-alleges-child-star-Corey-Feldman.html 'Paedophilia is Hollywood's biggest problem,' explosive claim by former child star Corey Feldman, UK Dailymail, August 12, 2011]</ref>

The father of teen idol Miley Cyrus said Disney destroyed their family. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/02/15/billy-ray-cyrus-scared-daughter-miley-says-hannah-montana-destroyed-family/#?test=faces Billy Ray Cyrus Scared For Daughter Miley, Says Hannah Montana 'Destroyed My Family', Fox News, February 15, 2011 </ref> Billy Ray Cyrus accuses Miley's 'handlers' (Disney Executives) of going too far to promote her and when she got bad press they made her father the scapegoat.

=== Reality Stars ===
[[MTV]] is notorious for filming underage reality stars. The pressure of instant fame with people in trying circumstances to begin with, the off camera news starts to creep more into the media. Arrests, suicide attempts, drugs and rehab are just some of the issues involving reality stars personal lives. Legal contracts with the network spell out MTV's rights to exploit their situations on the show. Psychologist Dr. Jeff Gardere. “In this country the media rewards bad behavior with more attention, thus more bad behavior is manifested because it is reinforced and rewarded." <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/06/17/is-mtv-repsonsible-when-at-risk-girls-it-exploits-go-off-deep-end/#ixzz1PYwX10oc Is MTV Responsible When At-Risk Teens it Features Go Off the Deep End?, Fox News, June 17, 2011]</ref>

==Productions==
The diseased moral values of the Liberal-dominated entertainment industry are manifested all too clearly in many of the products of that industry - motion pictures and television programs that offer no edification or instruction to the viewer, but plumb a cesspit of license and depravity. Some recent examples include the television series ''Desperate Housewives'' and the TV series/movie ''[[Sex and the City]]''.

==Religion==
A short study of the ten most successful actors <ref>http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php 10 most successful actors] </ref> shows that only 50% are Christian (compared to 76% for the general population), with 30% expressing no religious beliefs at all (15% in the general public). These actors have had successful careers and it is very likely that religious affiliation in regular actors is much lower, exposing or predisposing them to the influence of Hollywood values.

[[Scientology]] is practiced by many Hollywood personalities. Tom Cruise and John Travolta are perhaps the most well known Hollywood Scientologists.

==Books==
* ''Hollywood Against America''
* ''Hollywood Babylon'' (1965) by Kenneth Anger (US edition)
* ''Hollywood Babylon II'' (1984) by Kenneth Anger

==See also==
*[[Supermodel]]s
*[[Gallery of American Heroes]]
*[[World Famous Pictures]]

{{Liberalism}}
== References ==
{{Reflist|3}}

==External Links==
*[http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ic_Q3agTpruvzoCJ5UxWaAqGJW3A Bush attacks 'Hollywood values'], ''AFP'', Oct 1, 2007
*[http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/index.html Mug-shots of arrested Hollywood stars]
*[http://www.parentstv.org/ptc/news/articles/2010/mtvmovieawards.asp Parent's Television Council: MTV’s Movie Awards Will Honor Profanity]
*[http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/vernon/100802 From Hollywood: to Hitler with love (Stalin, too)]
*[http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/12/17/dumbest-things-celebs-said/?test=faces Ten Dumbest Things Celebs Said in 2010]
*[http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/entertainment/2011/01/04/foul-mouthed-celebs/?test=faces#slide=1 Foul Mouthed Celebrities]
*[http://www.irishexaminerusa.com/mt/2011/01/04/pop_culture_killing_classic_tr.html Pop Culture Killing Classic Traditions]
*[http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ Andrew Breitbart's BigHollywood.com]
[[category:entertainment]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]
[[Category:Social Problems]]
[[Category:Hollywood]]

User talk:SeanS

2011-10-29T20:11:38Z

SeanS: /* Relly retired */

Barack Hussein Obama

2011-10-26T01:31:36Z

SeanS:

{{Officeholder
|name=Barack Hussein Obama
|image=President Barack Obama.jpg
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama]]
|religion= [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage|Allegedly]] Christian
|offices=
{{Officeholder/president
|country=the United States
|number=44th
|terms=January 20, 2009-Present
|vp=[[Joe Biden]]
|preceded=[[George W. Bush]]
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Illinois
|terms=January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008
|preceded=Peter Fitzgerald
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Roland Burris]]
}}
}}

'''Barack Hussein Obama II''' (born August 4, 1961) is the 44th President of the [[United States]] and the controversial recipient of the 2009 [[Nobel Prize|Nobel Peace Prize]]. Overcoming a short political career, Obama defeated [[Republican]] nominee [[John McCain]] for the presidency in 2008, campaigning on promises of "hope" and "change". In effect, that change has been an embrace of [[socialism]], [[Marxism]], and [[liberal]] policies. Barack Obama has been widely criticized by the American [[business]] community and others for his anti-business policies that are killing American jobs during a period of high unemployment.<ref>
*[http://www.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/07/16/obamas-anti-business-policies-are-our-economic-katrina Obama's Anti-business Policies are our Economic Katrina]
*[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/619dvjlm.asp An Anti-Business President]
*[http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/small-businesses-are-not-hiring-why.html Small Businesses are not hiring. Why should they?]
*[http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/dear_mr_president_why_we_are_n.html Dear Mr. President: Why we are not hiring]
</ref> Trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] indicates that [[Obama administration]]'s response to the the failed American economy is more war and the creation of misleading [[economics|economic]] statistics.<ref>[http://www.opednews.com/articles/Washington-s-Response-to-a-by-paul-craig-roberts-110728-724.html Washington's response to the failed economy: More war]</ref>

Under President Obama's management of the economy, the United States Government's credit rating has, for the first time in it's history, been downgraded from AAA to AA+, and [[poverty]]<ref>http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf</ref> has increased markedly. By and large his policies to combat the recession, unemployment, slow growth, the deficit, and expanding [[national debt]], have failed.<ref>"The vast majority (73%) of respondents reported the fiscal stimulus enacted in February 2009 has had no impact on employment to date. While 68% also believe a jobs bill, such as the one recently enacted into law, will have no impact on payrolls, 30% do believe it will boost payrolls moderately". ''Industry Survey'', National Association for Business Economics, April 2010, [http://www.nabe.com/press/ind1004.pdf p. 2 pdf].</ref> Also on the domestic front, Obama passed an expensive [[health care]] bill in 2009 with no [[bipartisan]] support and 34 Democrats dissenting. In foreign policy Obama has escalated the [[Afghanistan War]] and, against his own Defense Secretary's advice, [[Libyan uprising 2011|attacked Libya]] - a possible violation of the [[War Powers Act]]. After he announced the killing of [[September 11th]] mastermind and terrorist [[Osama bin Laden]], the [[U.S. State Department]] warned of the increased risk to the lives and safety of Americans around the world.<ref>http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8273909</ref> Bin Laden's death had negligible long term impact on Obama's approval ratings.

==Early life==
:''Main article : [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]]''
:''See also : [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage]]''
Obama was born in Hawaii to Stanley Ann Dunham and [[Barack Obama Sr.]] - who had married just six months prior - on August 4, 1961 in [[Honolulu, Hawaii]]. The couple divorced in 1964. Barack Obama Sr. was not a [[Natural born citizen|citizen of the United States]]. Dunham remarried Lolo Soetoro, an [[Indonesia]]n student. When Obama was six, Soetoro returned to Indonesia, and Dunham and Obama followed.<ref name="db mother">{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-03/a-singular-woman-by-janny-scott-review-by-stacy-schiff/#|work=The Daily Beast|format=HTML|language=English|title=Dreams of His Mother|author=Stacy Schiff}}</ref> He spent four years in Indonesia before returning to Hawaii to be raised by his grandparents, Madelyn and WW2 veteran Stanley Armour Dunham. He would later attend Occidental College, [[Columbia University]] and then [[Harvard University]] for law school, where he would become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. It has been disputed by some groups whether Obama was actually born in the United States; some people allege that he was born in Kenya. On April 27, 2011 Obama officially released his long form birth certificate, which many experts have determined to be a fake and no legal body has determined its authenticity.

==Illinois State Senate career==
[[File:O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson.jpg|right|thumb|250px| Obama speaking at the October 2002 rally in Chicago organized by [[Carl Davidson]].<ref>Davidson is a longtime [[Mao]]ist and champion of the ''Thought of Mao Tse Tung.'' Davidson's anti-Trotskyite polemic, [http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=10925 ''Left in Form, Right in Essence''] defends Maoist doctrine. Retrieved from 对当代托洛茨基主义的批判：英文论集百花齐放 - 中国文革研究网, March 15, 2010.</ref> ''"[H]e is a brutal man who butchers his own people,"'' nevertheless Obama opposed ''"dumb wars".'']]

In 1995 Obama openly sought and obtained the endorsement of the [[Marxist]] [[New Party]] in his quest to be elected to the Illinois State Senate.<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434 NEW PARTY (NP)], discoverthenetwork.org.</ref><ref>Rick Moran. [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_alliance_with_marxists.html Obama's Alliance with Marxists], ''American Thinker'', June 03, 2008.</ref> He became the [[Democrat]] nominee and ran unopposed to win the election. Obama entered the Illinois Senate promising change to a corrupt system. He mixed often radical votes with more pragmatic agreements. Possibly one of his most radical votes was against requiring medical care for aborted children who survive [[abortion|the procedure]] - in fact the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council ascribed him a 100% rating for his consistently pro-choice votes.<ref name="cbs illinois">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml|title=Obama Record May Be Gold Mine For Critics|work=CBS|format=HTML|language=English|last=Clark|first=Amy S.|date=Jan. 17, 2007}}</ref> He was criticized for using the statehouse as a stepping stone for a more illustrious career: Steven J. Rauschenberger, a [[Republican]], said prior to Obama's election as president: “He is a very bright but very ambitious person who has always had his eyes on the prize, and it wasn’t Springfield. If he deserves to be president, it is not because he was a great legislator.”<ref name="nyt illinois">{{cite web|work=The New York Times|title=In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd|last=Scott|first=Janny|format=HTML|language=English|date=July 30, 2007|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.html}}</ref>

The statehouse was majority Republican, so the Senator was sometimes forced to compromise. He formed allegiances across party lines to pass [[campaign finance]] reform that banned most gifts by lobbyists, prohibited spending campaign money for legislators’ personal use and required electronic filing of campaign disclosure reports.<ref name="nyt illinois"/> Obama also helped pass a so-called “driving-while-black bill”, which required the police to collect data on the race of drivers they stopped as a way to monitor [[racial profiling]].<ref name="nyt illinois"/>

Obama established himself as a chief spokesperson in opposition to the [[War on Terror]] during an October 2002 rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago<ref>The rally was organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq (CAWI) later renamed Chicagoans Against War and Injustice. [http://www.noiraqwar-chicago.org/?page_id=2 About CAWI] by Carl Davidson, Nov 02 2006. Retrieved from Chicagoans Against War and Injustice, March 15, 2010.</ref> [[community organizing|organized]] by veteran [[Mao]]ist and webmaster of [[Progressives for Obama]],<ref>[http://www.linkedin.com/in/carldavidson Carl Davidson,] LinkedIn.com, retrieved March 13, 2010.</ref> [[Carl Davidson]].

===Radical foundation and connection to William Ayers===
{{main article|Radical roots of Barack Hussein Obama}}
In 1995 a cadre of like minded individuals gathered in the home of [[Weather Underground]] (WUO) [[terrorist]]s [[Bernardine Dohrn]] and [[William Ayers|William "Bill" Ayers]]. Dohrn,<ref>Georgie Anne Geyer and Keyes Beach "Cuba: School for U.S. Radicals", ''Chicago Daily News/Chicago Sun-Times'' five part series October 1970, excerpted in [http://foia.fbi.gov/filelink.html?file=/weather/weath1c.pdf FBI file Weather Underground Organization (Weatherman),] Part 1c pp. 5-7 pdf (113-115 in original). [http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/clandestine-agents-of-the-cuban-government-ayers-dohrn-myers/]</ref> along with Carl Davidson, are veterans of [[guerrilla warfare]] training in [[Cuba]] prior 1968 Democratic National Convention riots. Ayers and Dohrn have taken credit for, and never denied, bombing the [[U.S. Capitol]], the [[Pentagon]] and the [[State Department]].

Ayers and Dohrn used their celebrity status among [[leftist]]s to launch Obama's career. Ayers, Dohrn and [[Jeff Jones]]<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106653 ''Obama's 'green jobs czar' worked with terror founder] Van Jones served on board of activist group where ex-Weatherman serves as top director'', By Aaron Klein, [[WorldNetDaily]], August 13, 2009.</ref> are authors of ''[[Bill_Ayers#Prairie_Fire_Organizing_Committee_and_Maoist_thought|Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-imperialism]],'' the title taken from ''The Sayings of Mao Zedong.''<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/]</ref> The book declares "we are [[communist]] men and women."<ref>Harvey Klehr, ''Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today'' (Transaction Books, New Brunswick, 1988), 109.</ref> Ayers later jokingly, publicly admitted to ghostwriting Obama's book, ''Dreams From My Father''<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/ayers_affirms_he_wrote_dreams.html</ref> and Obama was to appoint several openly avowed Maoists to prominent White House and Executive Branch positions.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704597704574487431322664964.html</ref>

==U.S. Senate career==
:''See also: [[Early_life_and_career_of_Barack_Hussein_Obama#U.S._Senate_.282004-2008.29|Barack Obama:U.S. Senate (2004-2008)]]''
[[Image:obama.jpg|thumb|left|Senator Barack Obama]]

Following a failed campaign for the U. S. House of Representatives, Obama ran for the open Senate seat from Illinois in 2004 against Republican candidate Jack Ryan. He won the seat after Chicago media outlets The Chicago Tribune newspaper and Chicago ABC affiliate WLS-TV; together with candidate Jack Ryan's Republican Primary opponents, sought and obtained the release of the confidential and personally embarrassing records in his California divorce from actress Jeri Ryan, forcing him to end his campaign. Ryan was replaced by the out-of-state candidate [[Alan Keyes]]. Obama won over Keyes 70% to 27% in the general election. Obama spent very little time in the Senate - "frustrated by his lack of influence and what he called the 'glacial pace' ... [he began] running for president even as he was still getting lost in the Capitol’s corridors."<ref name="nyt senate">{{cite web|work=The New York Times|publisher=The New York Times, Inc.|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role|author=Kate Zernike and Jeff Zelleny|date=March 9, 2008|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/us/politics/09obama.html}}</ref>

Obama frequently used the [[filibuster]] to obstruct the operations of government,<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303801_pf.html</ref> voted against the [[minimum wage]]<ref>[http://uspolitics.about.com/od/legislatio1/a/HR2206.htm HR 2206 - Emergency Appropriations], Kathy Gill, Your Guide to U.S. Politics: Current Events. May 26 2007.</ref><ref>[http://more.gov.mtopgroup.com/2007/05/votes-hr-2206-iraq-supplemental.html Votes - H.R. 2206: Iraq Supplemental], May 28, 2007. Retrieved from Deeper Inside the Mountain, June 4, 2007.</ref> and debt ceiling increases,<ref>http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/obama-once-opposed-debt-ceiling-hike/237129/</ref> and recieved more than $126,000 in campaign contributions from [[Fannie Mae]]. The ''[[National Journal]]'' ranked him the most liberal senator in 2007.<ref name="ranked">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502163_162-3775451-502163.html|title=National Journal: Obama Most Liberal Senator In 2007|author=Brian Montopoli|date=January 31, 2008|work=CBS}}</ref>

==Presidential Election==
{{main article|Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign}}
Democrats began calling for an Obama candidacy after liberals lauded his 2004 [[Democratic National Convention]] speech.
===Campaign to be the Democratic nominee===
The race for the Democratic ticket originally seemed [[Hillary Clinton]]'s to lose, but was ultimately a close race between Clinton and Obama. Clinton would take a slim advantage in the popular vote, while Obama would carry significantly more states and territories. Obama's advantage with super-delegates over Clinton was about 2-to-1.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Superdelegate endorsements for Friday 6/6|work=Democratic Convention Watch|url=http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/06/superdelegate-endorsements-for-friday.html}}</ref> Obama was able to attract the support of [[liberals]] by pointing out that he had come out against the [[Iraq War]] "from the beginning" whereas Clinton had voted in favor of the war in 2002.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-31-democrats-debate_N.htm|title=Obama, Clinton stress differences on Iraq, issues|author=David Jackson|work=USA Today|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref>
===Campaign for the Presidency===
Obama campaigned against Senator [[John McCain]] in the general election. To the chagrin of Clinton supporters, he selected Senator [[Joe Biden]] to be his running mate, whereas McCain selected [[Governor]] of [[Alaska]] [[Sarah Palin]]. The Obama and Biden ticket would win the election, and Obama would become the nation's first [[African American]] president.

====Jeremiah Wright====
:''See also: [[Barack Obama and Liberation Theology]]''
One major dilemma that arose for Obama during his campaign was his connection to his preacher [[Jeremiah Wright]]. Obama and his wife (raised a Baptist) were members of the Trinity [[United Church of Christ]]<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776246/posts</ref> in Chicago, a chruch that embraced [[black liberation theology]] and its emphasis on empowering so-called "oppressed groups" against "establishment forces". This denomination was the first in America to ordain gays as ministers.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31079.html, Obama's church pushes controversial doctrines, March 20, 2008</ref> Church pastor Jeremiah Wright had been making inflammatory comments and posting his sermons online for sale. These include the statement "G-d damn America," and in describing the September 11th attacks, "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4443788 Obama's Pastor: G-d Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11]</ref> In addition, Rev. Wright blamed America saying "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being [[anti-Semitic]]."

In April 2008, after 20 years in the church, candidate Obama made public statements poised to set him at odds with the man who conducted his wedding and baptized his children. With the negative publicity persisting, a month later Obama ended the friendship, left Wright's church, and blamed the media.<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/31/obama-resigns-church-membership-in-chicago/], Obama Drops Church Membership in Chicago, May 31, 2008</ref> Obama claimed “It’s not fair to the other members of the church who seek to worship in peace...", and distanced himself from Wright's sermons as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth."<ref>USA TODAY, ''Obama breaks with former pastor, Candidate cites rants on U.S. role in terror, AIDS'', by Kathy Kiely and David Jackson [http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080430/1a_offlede30_dom.art.htm]</ref><ref>''Obama Says He Is Outraged By Wright's "Rants"''[http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080430.htm]</ref>

==Presidential career==
{{main article|Obama administration}}
[[File:Obama and George H. W. Bush.jpg|thumb|right|300px|President Barack Obama meets with former President George H. W. Bush in the Oval Office, Feb. 15, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza).]]
Under Obama's stewardship the United States has suffered the largest [[Federal budget deficit|deficit]]s<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10708/11-06-mbr.htm</ref><ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/118xx/doc11873/NovemberMBR.pdf</ref> in history and a credit downgrade from the rating agency Standard & Poor. Most observers attribute the deficits to increasing benefits and welfare paid out on account of the Recession he inherited and has failed to end along with decreasing tax receipts. Standard & Poor decided to downgrade U.S. government deby after the debt ceiling debate debacle, where Congressional leaders refused to pass a bill authorizing borrowing to pay for the budget they had passed with much debate and controversy earlier in the year. Cynics have argued that rhetoric directed at the rating agencies about the issuance of AAA ratings to junk real estate bonds spurred the downgrade as a form of retribution. Ironically, the investor scare led to the flocking of investors to the safe haven of the Treasury bonds which had been downgraded, resulting in lower interest rates. As there are very few AAA bond markets, investors will likely continue to buy U.S. government debt for the foreseeable future. <ref>http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/04/18/the-sp-outlook-and-obama/</ref> When his [[economic stimulus]] program was adopted unemployment rose and stagnated in the 10% range, <ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704476104575439172480870774.html?mod=googlenews_wsj</ref> leaving tens of millions without [[hope]] of finding a job.<ref>[http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS11300000&years_option=specific_years&include_graphs=true&to_month=1&from_month=2 United States Department of Labor], Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data extracted on: July 19, 2010 (4:31:11 PM).</ref>

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen, writing in the [[Wall Street Journal]], noted, "Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship." The commentators also note Obama's approach to governance has encouraged radical leftists to pursue a similar strategy on his behalf. Mary Frances Berry, former head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, acknowledged that the [[Obama administration]] has taken to polarizing America around the issue of race as a means of diverting attention from other issues, saying, "Having one's opponent [[race card|rebut charges of racism]] is far better than discussing [[Unemployment|joblessness]]."<ref>http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Mary_Frances_Berry_91E3D9D5-C40D-440C-9D48-1C50CBC60C87.html</ref> Caddell and Schoen, who worked for President Carter and Clinton, respectively, further stated, "Mr. Obama has also cynically [[class warfare|divided the country on class lines]]. He has taken to playing the populist card time and time again. He bashes Wall Street and insurance companies whenever convenient to advance his programs, yet he has been eager to accept campaign contributions and negotiate with these very same banks and [[corporation]]s behind closed doors in order to advance his political agenda... President Obama's divisive approach to governance has weakened us as a people and paralyzed our political culture."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748703700904575391553798363586.html</ref>

===Domestic policy===
====Popular bills====
Obama's first act of office was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act - effectively nullifying the [[Supreme Court]] case ''Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'', which ruled that Ledbetter had to have filed a pay [[discrimination]] suit within 180 days of the first time Ledbetter was payed less than her male peers;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/us/politics/30ledbetter-web.html|work=The New York Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obama Signs Equal-Pay Legislation|author=Sheryl Gay Stolberg|date=January 29, 2009}}</ref> the law made corporations subject to suit within 180 days of each time the employee was unfairly paid.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://writ.news.findlaw.com/grossman/20090213.html?=features|work=FindLaw|author=Joanna L. Grossman|date=Feb. 13, 2009|format=HTML|language=English|title=The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009}}</ref>

On January 2, 2011, Obama signed the James Zadroga [[9/11]] Healthcare and Compensation Act.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2011/jan/02/obama-signs-zadroga-act-law/|publisher=New York Public Radio|title=Obama Signs Zadroga Act into Law|author=Fred Mogul|date=January 02, 2011|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> The act, which afforded 9/11 first responders who were sickened by the dust from the collapse of the [[World Trade Center]] health care and compensation, passed [[Congress]] after its sponsored agreed to scale down the pricing from 7.4 to 4.2 billion dollars.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2010/dec/22/zadroga-911-bill-passes-senate/|publisher=New York Public Radio|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Congress Approves 9/11 Health Bill|date=December 22, 2010}}</ref>

====Economic plan====
[[File:Keynes.jpg|thumbnail|right|190px|[[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]] despite the fact that [[John Maynard Keynes]] was incompetent and a fraud.<ref>
*[http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/fabian-john-maynard-keynes-the-stealthy-enemy-of-human-freedom/ John Maynard Keynes the stealthy enemy of human freedom]
*[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-02-22/deathbed-of-keynesian-economics-will-be-in-u-k-matthew-lynn.html Deathbed of Keynesian Economics will be in the UK]
*[http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/show/23102.html Will the G8 Repudiate the Philosophy of Living Beyond Our Means?]
*[http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html KEYNES AT HARVARD Economic Deception as a Political Credo BY ZYGMUND DOBBS]
</ref> ]]
{{see also|Obamunism|American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009}}
Critics of the Obama administration have coined the word "[[Obamunism]]" to describe Barack Obama's [[socialism|socialistic]] and "[[fascism]] light" [[economic planning]] policies.<ref>[[Benito Mussolini]] defined fascism as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] labels [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|Obama's corporate bailouts]] as being "fascism light" in nature.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/daily-intel/2009/07/20/obamunism-inc|work=The Big Money|publisher=WashingtonPost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obamunism, Inc.|author=David Sessions|date=July 20, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/gerald-celente-6944|author=Jim Blasingame|title=Is the government creating a bailout bubble?}}</ref> Obamunism can also refer to Obama's [[Obama administration fiscal policy|ruinous fiscal policies]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|reckless monetary policies]].<ref name="gerard">{{cite web|url=http://seekingalpha.com/article/120883-monetary-policynot-obama-s-stimulusis-what-needs-watching|title=Monetary Policy-Not Obama's Stimulus-Is What Needs Watching|author=Gerard Jackson|date=February 16, 2009|work=Seeking Alpha}}</ref><ref name="bam">{{cite web|work=New York Post|date=May 17, 2009|url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/editorials/bams_wise_words_169731.htm|title=BAM'S WISE WORDS}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/|title=Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures|work=The Foundry|publisher=The Heritage Foundation|author=Conn Carroll|date=March 24th, 2009}}</ref> As seen in his own actions, Barack Obama instructed his advisors to find loopholes that would enable the president to act as a [[dictator]] by pushing through legislation and increases in spending without congressional authority.<ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/executive-dictatorship-obama-instructs-advisers-to-push-through-stimulus-projects-without-pesky-congressional-authorization/</ref>

[[Wall Street]] firms and banks that were bailed out were among Obama's biggest campaign supporters.<ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638</ref> Therefore, the Obama administration bailouts of corrupt, unproductive, and reckless Wall Street firms was hardly surprising, and many argue that it was not helpful in making the United States economy more productive and prosperous by encouraging more risk taking through letting banks off with a slap on the wrist. Others argue that bailing out the banks kept credit flowing and prevented a much deeper recession and a total collapse of the financial system. The government will recoup some though not all of its capital infusions over time. A 2005 study found that government corporate bailouts are often done for mere political considerations and the economic resources allocated exhibit significantly worse economic performance than resources allocated using purely business considerations.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=676905</ref> Proponents of [[free market]] capitalism said Bernanke should not have bailed out failing firms and instead should have allowed free market capitalism to quickly recover as it did in the depression of 1920 without government intervention (free market capitalists assert that government intervention drags out economic recessions and depressions).<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czcUmnsprQI</ref>

Top trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] predicts that the corrupt economic policies of the Obama administration will lead to a second [[Great Depression|great depression]] (Celente predicted the 1987 US stock market crash, the dot.com crash, the US 2008/2009 recession, and the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s) and may lead to a "second [[American Revolution]]" (Celente predicted the [[Tea Party Movement|tax protests]] that are now occurring in America).<ref name="celente1">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MMX3SKzrfU&feature=channel_page</ref><ref name="celente2">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9bfw1ebgw&feature=response_watch</ref> Celente also asserts that the costly and inefficient temporary short term methods that the Obama administration is using to alleviate economic problems in the short term (which is causing massive increases in [[Obama administration deficit spending]]) is only making matters worse and will not prevent the worse economic depression in United States history from occurring.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C8K7rWkGGw</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LBffdIW0XA&feature=response_watch</ref>

The Obama administration has been sharply criticized for [[Obama administration deficit spending|its massive deficit spending]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|its reckless monetary policy]] via vast increases in the [[money supply]], although inflation under Bernanke has been below the historic mean.<ref name="gerard"/><ref name="bam"/><ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/</ref> Celente predicts that if a "second American Revolution" occurs in a peaceful and productive manner, it may include a [[Third Party System|third party movement]] of governance that will advocate a more [[free market]] [[capitalism]] approach to the American economy and a more strict interpretation of the [[United States Constitution|United States constitution]] as far as the authors' [[original intent]].<ref name="celente1"/><ref name="celente2"/>

During what the [[White House]] billed as [[Recovery Summer]], one half million workers per week continued losing their jobs. His signature legislative achievement, [[ObamaCare]],has been found to be [[unconstitutional]]<ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-13/u-s-health-care-law-requirement-thrown-out-by-judge.html</ref> by several judges and constitutional by others, and is credited as a major cause of uncertainty, high [[unemployment]],<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33220</ref> lagging job creation,<ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/05/it%E2%80%99s-official-medicare%E2%80%99s-finances-shadowed-by-uncertainty/</ref> and risk of a credit default crisis.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/28/AR2010032802353.html</ref><ref>http://www.thestreet.com/story/10703361/cramer-obamacare-will-topple-the-market.html</ref>

His 2012 Budget plan has been roundly criticized in the mainstream and liberal press as not a serious effort to deal with the nation's economic crisis.<ref>[http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=blogs.view&blog_id=1551d6f5-2ac9-4b8d-97ab-74def354024e Newspapers Call Out White House: ‘What Would That Path Be, Mr. President?’]</ref>

=====Healthcare=====
{{main article|Obamacare}}
On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The act had originated in the House of Representatives and passed September 17, 2009. The act was amended and passed the Senate prior to [[Democrat]] [[Ted Kennedy]]'s passing along party lines - just a filibuster-proof majority at 60-39. In what can be construed as a de facto rejection of the bill, [[Massachusetts]] voters elected a [[Republican]] candidate, [[Scott Brown]], who promised to vote against the bill,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/scott-brown-wins-massachusetts-senate-race.html|work=The Washington Post|author=Chris Cillizza|date=January 19, 2010|title=Scott Brown wins Massachusetts Senate special election race|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> but another Senate vote would not occur. Scott Brown was also an excellent campaigner and judged to be a better candidate than his rival, Martha Coakley. He has since achieved one of the most moderate senate voting records, likely to avoid the anger of his mostly liberal constituency. After Obama made a promise to issue an [[executive order]] that would ultimately prohibit the use of taxpayer subsidies to pay for [[abortion]] services,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/22/nation/la-na-healthcare-passage22-2010mar22/3|work=The Los Angeles Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes historic healthcare overhaul|date=March 22, 2010|author=Noam N. Levey and Janet Hook}}</ref> the [[House of Representatives]] would pass the bill as it left the Senate 219-212, with 34 Democrats and all other parties dissenting.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-21/politics/health.care.main_1_health-care-entire-house-democratic-caucus-pre-existing-conditions?_s=PM:POLITICS|date=March 21, 2010|author=Alan Silverleib|work=CNN|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes health care bill on 219-212 vote}}</ref>

Amongst other things, the act mandates that the population purchase health care coverage or face punitive tax measures, and on this basis has been constitutionally challenged in the federal courts, with mixed results (three courts have upheld the act, two have declared it unconstitutional); thus, the Act is likely destined for [[Supreme Court]] reviewal. Plans originally proposed involved instituting a universal public insurance program, that is, extending Medicare to everyone. The universal mandate included in the act was originally a conservative idea that was enacted in Massachusetts under Republican Mitt Romney. Its supporters note that having health insurance results in reduced costs in paying for treatment of uninsured and forcing people to take responsibility for their healthcare. Due to ethical constraints, doctors cannot deny care to poor patients, resulting in the hospital and the healthcare system at large bearing the cost.

====Gulf oil spill====
{{main article|Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster}}
President Obama authorized offshore oil drilling in the [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0430/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-imperils-Obama-s-offshore-drilling-plan Gulf of Mexico oil spill imperils Obama's offshore drilling plan,] By Mark Clayton, ''Christian Science Monitor'', April 30, 2010.</ref> stating, "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills"<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref> and was widely criticized for his mishandling of the "[[Gulf oil spill disaster|worst environmental disaster]] in US history."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman Conscience of a Liberal: The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times'', April 30, 2010.</ref>

====Don't Ask Don't Tell====
{{main article|Don't Ask Don't Tell}}
Candidate Obama promised to repeal a policy that originated in the Clinton era that prohibited inquiries into military personnel's [[sexual orientation]] while also barring "out" [[homosexuals]] from serving in the military. [[Liberals]] expressed anger when time passed and no effort to repeal the law was seen;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/21/obama-to-delay-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/|work=The Washington Times|format=HTML|title=Obama to delay ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ repeal|language=English|author=Rowan Scarborough|date=November 21, 2008}}</ref> in fact, Obama's [[justice department]], as part of their duty to defend all laws passed by any administration, filed a brief arguing against the [[Supreme Court]] granting a [[writ of certiorari]] to a gay soldier challenging the law (the writ was not granted). In response, the soldier, James Pietrangelo II, a former Army infantryman and lawyer, said, “[Obama's] a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar. This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people."<ref>{{cite web|work=Time Magazine|publisher=Time Inc.|format=HTML|url=http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1903545,00.html?imw=Y|title=Dismay Over Obama's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Turnabout|author=Mark Thompson|date=Jun. 09, 2009}}</ref>

On December 15th, 2010, a bill was introduced in the [[House of Representatives]] to repeal the law - it passed a day later by a vote of 250-175;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll638.xml|title=FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 638|format=HTML|work=Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives}}</ref> it passed the Senate three days later 65-31.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00281|work=The U.S. Senate|title=U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> Obama signed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 on December 22nd.<ref name="g dadt">{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/22/obama-repeals-dont-ask-dont-tell|work=The Guardian|format=HTML|language=English|title='Don't ask, don't tell' repealed as Obama signs landmark law|date=22 December 2010}}</ref>

The [[Pentagon]] itself could not immediately implement the repeal and questioned whether it would hurt combat readiness.<ref name="g dadt"/> Senator [[John McCain]], the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, opposed the bill, saying "It may be premature to make such a change at this time and in this manner, without further consideration of this report and further study of the issue by Congress – for of all the people we serve, one of our highest responsibilities is to the men and women of our armed services, especially those risking their lives in combat.”<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/mccain-on-dont-ask-dont-tell-dont-rush/|title=McCain on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’: Don’t Rush|date=December 2nd, 2010|format=HTML|author=David M. Herszenhorn|language=English|work=The New York Times}}</ref>

===Foreign policy===
[[File:Western Wall Obama.jpg|thumb|left|320px|At [[Western Wall]], Jerusalem, 2008.]]
As Senator, Obama was highly critical of President Bush and promised change. As President, Obama has tripled down in Afghanistan, widened the war into Pakistan, multiplied drone attacks, bombed Yemen and Somalia, and started an undeclared NATO war in Libya. On presidential war powers, surveillance questions, Guantanamo, detention policy and habeas corpus, Obama has similarly stayed the course, or expanded Bush's precedents. In a speech on May 19, 2011 Obama fully embraced the [[Bush Doctrine]] of preventative war.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-news-in-obamas-speech/2011/05/19/AF4dFN7G_story.html</ref>

<blockquote>
The New America Foundation, which tracks the strikes, has listed 23 raids since the beginning of April, 2011, all but one in Pakistan’s tribal regions of North and South Waziristan. A June 20 attack was reported in Kurram, an area north of North Waziristan along the Afghanistan border.
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The drone program has become increasingly controversial as the Obama administration has expanded its use beyond the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Lethal missiles have been launched from unmanned aircraft in at least five countries in addition to Pakistan: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and, most recently, Somalia. The military’s Joint Special Operations Command used a drone last June to attack what officials said were two senior members of the Al Shabab militant group on the Somali coast. [http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2011/07/04/cia_halts_drone_launches_from_pakistan_base/]
</blockquote>

====Commander-in-chief====
By Obama's second year as Commander-in-Chief, 559 American troops died in Iraq and Afghanistan - significantly more than the 469 who died during Presisdent [[George W. Bush]]'s final year in office. And growing numbers of civilian contractors also have fallen. In the first half of 2010, 250 contractors reportedly died in Iraq and Afghanistan - more than the 235 military personnel who fell during the same period.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/05/24/114662/what-price-war.html#ixzz1Nz07pg5O</ref>

=====Afghanistan=====
{{main article|Afghanistan War}}
Obama escalated troop strength<ref name="pbs">{{cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamaswar/themes/strategy.html#ixzz1LhWNImZp|title=Obama's New Strategy (March '09)|author=George Packer, Seth Jones, David Kilcullen, Rory Stewart, Andrew Exum, Col. Andrew Bacevich (Ret.)|work=PBS|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> and defense costs in Afghanistan from $43.5 billion in George Bush's last year to $113.7 billion for 2011.<ref>Congressional Research Service, quoted in Gregory Anthony, ''What price war?''</ref> Adviser to General [[Stanley McChrystal]] David Kilcullen wrote, "One of the big strategic shifts is the use of language now which talks about Pakistan and Afghanistan as the same theater. Now we talked about Af-Pak long before the Obama administration came about, but the public use of that term, and the description of it as the Afghanistan-Pakistan campaign, sends a new message to people about how the administration is going to think about Afghanistan and Pakistan."<ref name="pbs"/> This became evident when, under the orders of Obama, a military SEALs team killed September 11th mastermind [[Osama bin Laden]] in Abottabad, Pakistan.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newsweek.com/2011/05/05/commander-in-chief.html|title=Commander in Chief|author=Daniel Romano and Daniel Klaidman|date=May 05, 2011|work=Newsweek|publisher=The Newsweek/Daily Beast Company LLC|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref>

=====Iraq=====
{{main article|Operation Iraqi Freedom}}
Obama campaigned on a promise to end the War in Iraq, however 50,000 U.S. troops remain in the country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-31/politics/obama.oval.office.address_1_iraq-requests-united-states-and-iraq-troop-surge?_s=PM:POLITICS|work=CNN|title=Obama: 'Time to turn the page' as Iraq combat mission ends|date=August 31, 2010|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref>

=====Guantanamo Bay=====
{{main article|Guantanamo Bay}}
One of Obama's campaign promises was that he would close the American detention center at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - detainees would be flown to other countries while the ones awaiting trial would enter the American court system. Two days after taking office he signed an order directing the military to do so.<ref name="salon">{{cite web|url=http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric|work=Salon|title=The Obama/Gitmo timeline|author=Natasha Lennard|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> But, in November 2009 Obama admitted that his self imposed deadline of January 2010 would be missed, and in March 2011 the president went back on his campaign promise, signing an executive order to create a formal system of indefinite detention for the prisoners.<ref name="salon"/>

=====Libya=====
{{main article|Libyan uprising 2011}}
In February 2011, the political unrest that had spread through the Arab world showed up as protests in Libya. Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi - dictator of Libya for 41 years - responded to the activism with a wave of violence.<ref name="nyt libya">{{cite web|url=http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html|work=The New York Times|publisher=The New York Times Inc.|format=HTML|language=English|title=Libya — Protests and Revolt (2011)}}</ref> The [[United Nations Security Council]] voted unanimously to impose [[sanctions]], and later authorized all members to take action to protect civilians. Obama, acting without approval from Congress and at the beckoning of the [[United Nations]], directed American forces to take out Libya's air defense system.<ref name="nyt libya"/> Obama later said, "[I]f we waited one more day Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world."<ref>{{cite web|author=Barack Obama|url=http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134935452/obamas-speech-on-libya-a-responsibility-to-act|title=Obama's Speech On Libya: 'A Responsibility To Act'|date=March 28, 2011|publisher=National Public Radio ([[NPR]])|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> [[Alan J. Kuperman]] - writing an editorial for the ''[[Boston Globe]]'' - suggested this statement was false, writing, "[I]ntervention did not prevent genocide, because no such bloodbath was in the offing. To the contrary, by emboldening rebellion, US interference has prolonged Libya’s civil war and the resultant suffering of innocents."<ref name="kuperman">{{cite web|author=Alan J. Kuperman|work=The Boston Globe|url=http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-14/bostonglobe/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions|title=False pretense for war in Libya?|date=April 14, 2011}}</ref> Kuperman, a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas who authored a book called ''The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention'', further stated that the rebels had tricked the world into thinking a bloodbath was at hand and that Obama had lied to the American people in order to act on this theory.<ref name="kuperman"/>
<blockquote>
Gaddafi [never] threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy’’ warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.’’ Khadafy even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.’’ <ref> [http://politicalcartel.org/2011/04/17/libya-and-the-obama-doctrine/ Libya and the “Obama Doctrine”.] </ref>
</blockquote>

However Gaddafi wrote to Obama:

<blockquote>
Gaddafi said he bore no ill will toward Obama. "We have been hurt more morally than physically because of what had happened against us in both deeds and words by you," he wrote. "Despite all this you will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the USA. We endeavour and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaign." The letter, dated 5 April 2011 in Tripoli, is signed "Mu'aumer Qaddaffi, Leader of the Revolution".<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/06/gaddafi-obama-nato-libya?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487]</ref>
</blockquote>

Critics point out the only thing worse than starting a "stupid, unnecessary war" against a madman is losing it.<ref>http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271847/war-libya-dumb-and-dumber-victor-davis-hanson</ref>

==See also==

*[[Political positions of Barack Obama]]
*[[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]]
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm]

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

{{USPresidents}}
{{2008 presidential candidates}}
[[Category: Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[category:Nobel laureates in Peace]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Obama, Barack Hussein}}

Barack Hussein Obama

2011-10-26T01:22:06Z

SeanS: Undo revision 931203 by ElliotS (talk)

{{Officeholder
|name=Barack Hussein Obama
|image=President Barack Obama.jpg
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama]]
|religion= [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage|Allegedly]] Christian
|offices=
{{Officeholder/president
|country=the United States
|number=44th
|terms=January 20, 2009-Present
|vp=[[Joe Biden]]
|preceded=[[George W. Bush]]
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Illinois
|terms=January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008
|preceded=Peter Fitzgerald
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Roland Burris]]
}}
}}

'''Barack Hussein Obama II''' (born August 4, 1961) is the 44th President of the [[United States]] and the controversial recipient of the 2009 [[Nobel Prize|Nobel Peace Prize]]. Overcoming a short political career, Obama defeated [[Republican]] nominee [[John McCain]] for the presidency in 2008, campaigning on promises of "hope" and "change". In effect, that change has been an embrace of [[socialism]], [[Marxism]], and [[liberal]] policies. Barack Obama has been widely criticized by the American [[business]] community and others for his anti-business policies that are killing American jobs during a period of high unemployment.<ref>
*[http://www.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/07/16/obamas-anti-business-policies-are-our-economic-katrina Obama's Anti-business Policies are our Economic Katrina]
*[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/619dvjlm.asp An Anti-Business President]
*[http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/small-businesses-are-not-hiring-why.html Small Businesses are not hiring. Why should they?]
*[http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/dear_mr_president_why_we_are_n.html Dear Mr. President: Why we are not hiring]
</ref> Trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] indicates that [[Obama administration]]'s response to the the failed American economy is more war and the creation of misleading [[economics|economic]] statistics.<ref>[http://www.opednews.com/articles/Washington-s-Response-to-a-by-paul-craig-roberts-110728-724.html Washington's response to the failed economy: More war]</ref>

Under President Obama's management of the economy, the United States Government's credit rating has, for the first time in it's history, been downgraded from AAA to AA+, and [[poverty]]<ref>http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf</ref> has increased markedly. By and large his policies to combat the recession, unemployment, slow growth, the deficit, and expanding [[national debt]], have failed.<ref>"The vast majority (73%) of respondents reported the fiscal stimulus enacted in February 2009 has had no impact on employment to date. While 68% also believe a jobs bill, such as the one recently enacted into law, will have no impact on payrolls, 30% do believe it will boost payrolls moderately". ''Industry Survey'', National Association for Business Economics, April 2010, [http://www.nabe.com/press/ind1004.pdf p. 2 pdf].</ref> Also on the domestic front, Obama passed an expensive [[health care]] bill in 2009 with no [[bipartisan]] support and 34 Democrats dissenting. In foreign policy Obama has escalated the [[Afghanistan War]] and, against his own Defense Secretary's advice, [[Libyan uprising 2011|attacked Libya]] - a possible violation of the [[War Powers Act]]. After he announced the killing of [[September 11th]] mastermind and terrorist [[Osama bin Laden]], the [[U.S. State Department]] warned of the increased risk to the lives and safety of Americans around the world.<ref>http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8273909</ref> Bin Laden's death had negligible impact on Obama's approval ratings.

==Early life==
:''Main article : [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]]''
:''See also : [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage]]''
Obama was born in Hawaii to Stanley Ann Dunham and [[Barack Obama Sr.]] - who had married just six months prior - on August 4, 1961 in [[Honolulu, Hawaii]]. The couple divorced in 1964. Barack Obama Sr. was not a [[Natural born citizen|citizen of the United States]]. Dunham remarried Lolo Soetoro, an [[Indonesia]]n student. When Obama was six, Soetoro returned to Indonesia, and Dunham and Obama followed.<ref name="db mother">{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-03/a-singular-woman-by-janny-scott-review-by-stacy-schiff/#|work=The Daily Beast|format=HTML|language=English|title=Dreams of His Mother|author=Stacy Schiff}}</ref> He spent four years in Indonesia before returning to Hawaii to be raised by his grandparents, Madelyn and WW2 veteran Stanley Armour Dunham. He would later attend Occidental College, [[Columbia University]] and then [[Harvard University]] for law school, where he would become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. It has been disputed by some groups whether Obama was actually born in the United States; some people allege that he was born in Kenya. On April 27, 2011 Obama officially released his long form birth certificate, which many experts have determined to be a fake and no legal body has determined its authenticity.

==Illinois State Senate career==
[[File:O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson.jpg|right|thumb|250px| Obama speaking at the October 2002 rally in Chicago organized by [[Carl Davidson]].<ref>Davidson is a longtime [[Mao]]ist and champion of the ''Thought of Mao Tse Tung.'' Davidson's anti-Trotskyite polemic, [http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=10925 ''Left in Form, Right in Essence''] defends Maoist doctrine. Retrieved from 对当代托洛茨基主义的批判：英文论集百花齐放 - 中国文革研究网, March 15, 2010.</ref> ''"[H]e is a brutal man who butchers his own people,"'' nevertheless Obama opposed ''"dumb wars".'']]

In 1995 Obama openly sought and obtained the endorsement of the [[Marxist]] [[New Party]] in his quest to be elected to the Illinois State Senate.<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434 NEW PARTY (NP)], discoverthenetwork.org.</ref><ref>Rick Moran. [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_alliance_with_marxists.html Obama's Alliance with Marxists], ''American Thinker'', June 03, 2008.</ref> He became the [[Democrat]] nominee and ran unopposed to win the election. Obama entered the Illinois Senate promising change to a corrupt system. He mixed often radical votes with more pragmatic agreements. Possibly one of his most radical votes was against requiring medical care for aborted children who survive [[abortion|the procedure]] - in fact the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council ascribed him a 100% rating for his consistently pro-choice votes.<ref name="cbs illinois">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml|title=Obama Record May Be Gold Mine For Critics|work=CBS|format=HTML|language=English|last=Clark|first=Amy S.|date=Jan. 17, 2007}}</ref> He was criticized for using the statehouse as a stepping stone for a more illustrious career: Steven J. Rauschenberger, a [[Republican]], said prior to Obama's election as president: “He is a very bright but very ambitious person who has always had his eyes on the prize, and it wasn’t Springfield. If he deserves to be president, it is not because he was a great legislator.”<ref name="nyt illinois">{{cite web|work=The New York Times|title=In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd|last=Scott|first=Janny|format=HTML|language=English|date=July 30, 2007|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.html}}</ref>

The statehouse was majority Republican, so the Senator was sometimes forced to compromise. He formed allegiances across party lines to pass [[campaign finance]] reform that banned most gifts by lobbyists, prohibited spending campaign money for legislators’ personal use and required electronic filing of campaign disclosure reports.<ref name="nyt illinois"/> Obama also helped pass a so-called “driving-while-black bill”, which required the police to collect data on the race of drivers they stopped as a way to monitor [[racial profiling]].<ref name="nyt illinois"/>

Obama established himself as a chief spokesperson in opposition to the [[War on Terror]] during an October 2002 rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago<ref>The rally was organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq (CAWI) later renamed Chicagoans Against War and Injustice. [http://www.noiraqwar-chicago.org/?page_id=2 About CAWI] by Carl Davidson, Nov 02 2006. Retrieved from Chicagoans Against War and Injustice, March 15, 2010.</ref> [[community organizing|organized]] by veteran [[Mao]]ist and webmaster of [[Progressives for Obama]],<ref>[http://www.linkedin.com/in/carldavidson Carl Davidson,] LinkedIn.com, retrieved March 13, 2010.</ref> [[Carl Davidson]].

===Radical foundation and connection to William Ayers===
{{main article|Radical roots of Barack Hussein Obama}}
In 1995 a cadre of like minded individuals gathered in the home of [[Weather Underground]] (WUO) [[terrorist]]s [[Bernardine Dohrn]] and [[William Ayers|William "Bill" Ayers]]. Dohrn,<ref>Georgie Anne Geyer and Keyes Beach "Cuba: School for U.S. Radicals", ''Chicago Daily News/Chicago Sun-Times'' five part series October 1970, excerpted in [http://foia.fbi.gov/filelink.html?file=/weather/weath1c.pdf FBI file Weather Underground Organization (Weatherman),] Part 1c pp. 5-7 pdf (113-115 in original). [http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/clandestine-agents-of-the-cuban-government-ayers-dohrn-myers/]</ref> along with Carl Davidson, are veterans of [[guerrilla warfare]] training in [[Cuba]] prior 1968 Democratic National Convention riots. Ayers and Dohrn have taken credit for, and never denied, bombing the [[U.S. Capitol]], the [[Pentagon]] and the [[State Department]].

Ayers and Dohrn used their celebrity status among [[leftist]]s to launch Obama's career. Ayers, Dohrn and [[Jeff Jones]]<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106653 ''Obama's 'green jobs czar' worked with terror founder] Van Jones served on board of activist group where ex-Weatherman serves as top director'', By Aaron Klein, [[WorldNetDaily]], August 13, 2009.</ref> are authors of ''[[Bill_Ayers#Prairie_Fire_Organizing_Committee_and_Maoist_thought|Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-imperialism]],'' the title taken from ''The Sayings of Mao Zedong.''<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/]</ref> The book declares "we are [[communist]] men and women."<ref>Harvey Klehr, ''Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today'' (Transaction Books, New Brunswick, 1988), 109.</ref> Ayers later jokingly, publicly admitted to ghostwriting Obama's book, ''Dreams From My Father''<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/ayers_affirms_he_wrote_dreams.html</ref> and Obama was to appoint several openly avowed Maoists to prominent White House and Executive Branch positions.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704597704574487431322664964.html</ref>

==U.S. Senate career==
:''See also: [[Early_life_and_career_of_Barack_Hussein_Obama#U.S._Senate_.282004-2008.29|Barack Obama:U.S. Senate (2004-2008)]]''
[[Image:obama.jpg|thumb|left|Senator Barack Obama]]

Following a failed campaign for the U. S. House of Representatives, Obama ran for the open Senate seat from Illinois in 2004 against Republican candidate Jack Ryan. He won the seat after Chicago media outlets The Chicago Tribune newspaper and Chicago ABC affiliate WLS-TV; together with candidate Jack Ryan's Republican Primary opponents, sought and obtained the release of the confidential and personally embarrassing records in his California divorce from actress Jeri Ryan, forcing him to end his campaign. Ryan was replaced by the out-of-state candidate [[Alan Keyes]]. Obama won over Keyes 70% to 27% in the general election. Obama spent very little time in the Senate - "frustrated by his lack of influence and what he called the 'glacial pace' ... [he began] running for president even as he was still getting lost in the Capitol’s corridors."<ref name="nyt senate">{{cite web|work=The New York Times|publisher=The New York Times, Inc.|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role|author=Kate Zernike and Jeff Zelleny|date=March 9, 2008|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/us/politics/09obama.html}}</ref>

Obama frequently used the [[filibuster]] to obstruct the operations of government,<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303801_pf.html</ref> voted against the [[minimum wage]]<ref>[http://uspolitics.about.com/od/legislatio1/a/HR2206.htm HR 2206 - Emergency Appropriations], Kathy Gill, Your Guide to U.S. Politics: Current Events. May 26 2007.</ref><ref>[http://more.gov.mtopgroup.com/2007/05/votes-hr-2206-iraq-supplemental.html Votes - H.R. 2206: Iraq Supplemental], May 28, 2007. Retrieved from Deeper Inside the Mountain, June 4, 2007.</ref> and debt ceiling increases,<ref>http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/obama-once-opposed-debt-ceiling-hike/237129/</ref> and recieved more than $126,000 in campaign contributions from [[Fannie Mae]]. The ''[[National Journal]]'' ranked him the most liberal senator in 2007.<ref name="ranked">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502163_162-3775451-502163.html|title=National Journal: Obama Most Liberal Senator In 2007|author=Brian Montopoli|date=January 31, 2008|work=CBS}}</ref>

==Presidential Election==
{{main article|Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign}}
Democrats began calling for an Obama candidacy after liberals lauded his 2004 [[Democratic National Convention]] speech.
===Campaign to be the Democratic nominee===
The race for the Democratic ticket originally seemed [[Hillary Clinton]]'s to lose, but was ultimately a close race between Clinton and Obama. Clinton would take a slim advantage in the popular vote, while Obama would carry significantly more states and territories. Obama's advantage with super-delegates over Clinton was about 2-to-1.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Superdelegate endorsements for Friday 6/6|work=Democratic Convention Watch|url=http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/06/superdelegate-endorsements-for-friday.html}}</ref> Obama was able to attract the support of [[liberals]] by pointing out that he had come out against the [[Iraq War]] "from the beginning" whereas Clinton had voted in favor of the war in 2002.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-31-democrats-debate_N.htm|title=Obama, Clinton stress differences on Iraq, issues|author=David Jackson|work=USA Today|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref>
===Campaign for the Presidency===
Obama campaigned against Senator [[John McCain]] in the general election. To the chagrin of Clinton supporters, he selected Senator [[Joe Biden]] to be his running mate, whereas McCain selected [[Governor]] of [[Alaska]] [[Sarah Palin]]. The Obama and Biden ticket would win the election, and Obama would become the nation's first [[African American]] president.

====Jeremiah Wright====
:''See also: [[Barack Obama and Liberation Theology]]''
One major dilemma that arose for Obama during his campaign was his connection to his preacher [[Jeremiah Wright]]. Obama and his wife (raised a Baptist) were members of the Trinity [[United Church of Christ]]<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776246/posts</ref> in Chicago, a chruch that embraced [[black liberation theology]] and its emphasis on empowering so-called "oppressed groups" against "establishment forces". This denomination was the first in America to ordain gays as ministers.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31079.html, Obama's church pushes controversial doctrines, March 20, 2008</ref> Church pastor Jeremiah Wright had been making inflammatory comments and posting his sermons online for sale. These include the statement "G-d damn America," and in describing the September 11th attacks, "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4443788 Obama's Pastor: G-d Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11]</ref> In addition, Rev. Wright blamed America saying "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being [[anti-Semitic]]."

In April 2008, after 20 years in the church, candidate Obama made public statements poised to set him at odds with the man who conducted his wedding and baptized his children. With the negative publicity persisting, a month later Obama ended the friendship, left Wright's church, and blamed the media.<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/31/obama-resigns-church-membership-in-chicago/], Obama Drops Church Membership in Chicago, May 31, 2008</ref> Obama claimed “It’s not fair to the other members of the church who seek to worship in peace...", and distanced himself from Wright's sermons as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth."<ref>USA TODAY, ''Obama breaks with former pastor, Candidate cites rants on U.S. role in terror, AIDS'', by Kathy Kiely and David Jackson [http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080430/1a_offlede30_dom.art.htm]</ref><ref>''Obama Says He Is Outraged By Wright's "Rants"''[http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080430.htm]</ref>

==Presidential career==
{{main article|Obama administration}}
[[File:Obama and George H. W. Bush.jpg|thumb|right|300px|President Barack Obama meets with former President George H. W. Bush in the Oval Office, Feb. 15, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza).]]
Under Obama's stewardship the United States has suffered the largest [[Federal budget deficit|deficit]]s<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10708/11-06-mbr.htm</ref><ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/118xx/doc11873/NovemberMBR.pdf</ref> in history and a credit downgrade from the rating agency Standard & Poor. Most observers attribute the deficits to increasing benefits and welfare paid out on account of the Recession he inherited and has failed to end along with decreasing tax receipts. Standard & Poor decided to downgrade U.S. government deby after the debt ceiling debate debacle, where Congressional leaders refused to pass a bill authorizing borrowing to pay for the budget they had passed with much debate and controversy earlier in the year. Cynics have argued that rhetoric directed at the rating agencies about the issuance of AAA ratings to junk real estate bonds spurred the downgrade as a form of retribution. Ironically, the investor scare led to the flocking of investors to the safe haven of the Treasury bonds which had been downgraded, resulting in lower interest rates. As there are very few AAA bond markets, investors will likely continue to buy U.S. government debt for the foreseeable future. <ref>http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/04/18/the-sp-outlook-and-obama/</ref> When his [[economic stimulus]] program was adopted unemployment rose and stagnated in the 10% range, <ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704476104575439172480870774.html?mod=googlenews_wsj</ref> leaving tens of millions without [[hope]] of finding a job.<ref>[http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS11300000&years_option=specific_years&include_graphs=true&to_month=1&from_month=2 United States Department of Labor], Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data extracted on: July 19, 2010 (4:31:11 PM).</ref>

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen, writing in the [[Wall Street Journal]], noted, "Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship." The commentators also note Obama's approach to governance has encouraged radical leftists to pursue a similar strategy on his behalf. Mary Frances Berry, former head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, acknowledged that the [[Obama administration]] has taken to polarizing America around the issue of race as a means of diverting attention from other issues, saying, "Having one's opponent [[race card|rebut charges of racism]] is far better than discussing [[Unemployment|joblessness]]."<ref>http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Mary_Frances_Berry_91E3D9D5-C40D-440C-9D48-1C50CBC60C87.html</ref> Caddell and Schoen, who worked for President Carter and Clinton, respectively, further stated, "Mr. Obama has also cynically [[class warfare|divided the country on class lines]]. He has taken to playing the populist card time and time again. He bashes Wall Street and insurance companies whenever convenient to advance his programs, yet he has been eager to accept campaign contributions and negotiate with these very same banks and [[corporation]]s behind closed doors in order to advance his political agenda... President Obama's divisive approach to governance has weakened us as a people and paralyzed our political culture."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748703700904575391553798363586.html</ref>

===Domestic policy===
====Popular bills====
Obama's first act of office was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act - effectively nullifying the [[Supreme Court]] case ''Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'', which ruled that Ledbetter had to have filed a pay [[discrimination]] suit within 180 days of the first time Ledbetter was payed less than her male peers;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/us/politics/30ledbetter-web.html|work=The New York Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obama Signs Equal-Pay Legislation|author=Sheryl Gay Stolberg|date=January 29, 2009}}</ref> the law made corporations subject to suit within 180 days of each time the employee was unfairly paid.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://writ.news.findlaw.com/grossman/20090213.html?=features|work=FindLaw|author=Joanna L. Grossman|date=Feb. 13, 2009|format=HTML|language=English|title=The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009}}</ref>

On January 2, 2011, Obama signed the James Zadroga [[9/11]] Healthcare and Compensation Act.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2011/jan/02/obama-signs-zadroga-act-law/|publisher=New York Public Radio|title=Obama Signs Zadroga Act into Law|author=Fred Mogul|date=January 02, 2011|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> The act, which afforded 9/11 first responders who were sickened by the dust from the collapse of the [[World Trade Center]] health care and compensation, passed [[Congress]] after its sponsored agreed to scale down the pricing from 7.4 to 4.2 billion dollars.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2010/dec/22/zadroga-911-bill-passes-senate/|publisher=New York Public Radio|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Congress Approves 9/11 Health Bill|date=December 22, 2010}}</ref>

====Economic plan====
[[File:Keynes.jpg|thumbnail|right|190px|[[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]] despite the fact that [[John Maynard Keynes]] was incompetent and a fraud.<ref>
*[http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/fabian-john-maynard-keynes-the-stealthy-enemy-of-human-freedom/ John Maynard Keynes the stealthy enemy of human freedom]
*[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-02-22/deathbed-of-keynesian-economics-will-be-in-u-k-matthew-lynn.html Deathbed of Keynesian Economics will be in the UK]
*[http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/show/23102.html Will the G8 Repudiate the Philosophy of Living Beyond Our Means?]
*[http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html KEYNES AT HARVARD Economic Deception as a Political Credo BY ZYGMUND DOBBS]
</ref> ]]
{{see also|Obamunism|American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009}}
Critics of the Obama administration have coined the word "[[Obamunism]]" to describe Barack Obama's [[socialism|socialistic]] and "[[fascism]] light" [[economic planning]] policies.<ref>[[Benito Mussolini]] defined fascism as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] labels [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|Obama's corporate bailouts]] as being "fascism light" in nature.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/daily-intel/2009/07/20/obamunism-inc|work=The Big Money|publisher=WashingtonPost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obamunism, Inc.|author=David Sessions|date=July 20, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/gerald-celente-6944|author=Jim Blasingame|title=Is the government creating a bailout bubble?}}</ref> Obamunism can also refer to Obama's [[Obama administration fiscal policy|ruinous fiscal policies]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|reckless monetary policies]].<ref name="gerard">{{cite web|url=http://seekingalpha.com/article/120883-monetary-policynot-obama-s-stimulusis-what-needs-watching|title=Monetary Policy-Not Obama's Stimulus-Is What Needs Watching|author=Gerard Jackson|date=February 16, 2009|work=Seeking Alpha}}</ref><ref name="bam">{{cite web|work=New York Post|date=May 17, 2009|url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/editorials/bams_wise_words_169731.htm|title=BAM'S WISE WORDS}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/|title=Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures|work=The Foundry|publisher=The Heritage Foundation|author=Conn Carroll|date=March 24th, 2009}}</ref> As seen in his own actions, Barack Obama instructed his advisors to find loopholes that would enable the president to act as a [[dictator]] by pushing through legislation and increases in spending without congressional authority.<ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/executive-dictatorship-obama-instructs-advisers-to-push-through-stimulus-projects-without-pesky-congressional-authorization/</ref>

[[Wall Street]] firms and banks that were bailed out were among Obama's biggest campaign supporters.<ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638</ref> Therefore, the Obama administration bailouts of corrupt, unproductive, and reckless Wall Street firms was hardly surprising, and many argue that it was not helpful in making the United States economy more productive and prosperous by encouraging more risk taking through letting banks off with a slap on the wrist. Others argue that bailing out the banks kept credit flowing and prevented a much deeper recession and a total collapse of the financial system. The government will recoup some though not all of its capital infusions over time. A 2005 study found that government corporate bailouts are often done for mere political considerations and the economic resources allocated exhibit significantly worse economic performance than resources allocated using purely business considerations.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=676905</ref> Proponents of [[free market]] capitalism said Bernanke should not have bailed out failing firms and instead should have allowed free market capitalism to quickly recover as it did in the depression of 1920 without government intervention (free market capitalists assert that government intervention drags out economic recessions and depressions).<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czcUmnsprQI</ref>

Top trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] predicts that the corrupt economic policies of the Obama administration will lead to a second [[Great Depression|great depression]] (Celente predicted the 1987 US stock market crash, the dot.com crash, the US 2008/2009 recession, and the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s) and may lead to a "second [[American Revolution]]" (Celente predicted the [[Tea Party Movement|tax protests]] that are now occurring in America).<ref name="celente1">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MMX3SKzrfU&feature=channel_page</ref><ref name="celente2">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9bfw1ebgw&feature=response_watch</ref> Celente also asserts that the costly and inefficient temporary short term methods that the Obama administration is using to alleviate economic problems in the short term (which is causing massive increases in [[Obama administration deficit spending]]) is only making matters worse and will not prevent the worse economic depression in United States history from occurring.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C8K7rWkGGw</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LBffdIW0XA&feature=response_watch</ref>

The Obama administration has been sharply criticized for [[Obama administration deficit spending|its massive deficit spending]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|its reckless monetary policy]] via vast increases in the [[money supply]], although inflation under Bernanke has been below the historic mean.<ref name="gerard"/><ref name="bam"/><ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/</ref> Celente predicts that if a "second American Revolution" occurs in a peaceful and productive manner, it may include a [[Third Party System|third party movement]] of governance that will advocate a more [[free market]] [[capitalism]] approach to the American economy and a more strict interpretation of the [[United States Constitution|United States constitution]] as far as the authors' [[original intent]].<ref name="celente1"/><ref name="celente2"/>

During what the [[White House]] billed as [[Recovery Summer]], one half million workers per week continued losing their jobs. His signature legislative achievement, [[ObamaCare]],has been found to be [[unconstitutional]]<ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-13/u-s-health-care-law-requirement-thrown-out-by-judge.html</ref> by several judges and constitutional by others, and is credited as a major cause of uncertainty, high [[unemployment]],<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33220</ref> lagging job creation,<ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/05/it%E2%80%99s-official-medicare%E2%80%99s-finances-shadowed-by-uncertainty/</ref> and risk of a credit default crisis.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/28/AR2010032802353.html</ref><ref>http://www.thestreet.com/story/10703361/cramer-obamacare-will-topple-the-market.html</ref>

His 2012 Budget plan has been roundly criticized in the mainstream and liberal press as not a serious effort to deal with the nation's economic crisis.<ref>[http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=blogs.view&blog_id=1551d6f5-2ac9-4b8d-97ab-74def354024e Newspapers Call Out White House: ‘What Would That Path Be, Mr. President?’]</ref>

=====Healthcare=====
{{main article|Obamacare}}
On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The act had originated in the House of Representatives and passed September 17, 2009. The act was amended and passed the Senate prior to [[Democrat]] [[Ted Kennedy]]'s passing along party lines - just a filibuster-proof majority at 60-39. In what can be construed as a de facto rejection of the bill, [[Massachusetts]] voters elected a [[Republican]] candidate, [[Scott Brown]], who promised to vote against the bill,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/scott-brown-wins-massachusetts-senate-race.html|work=The Washington Post|author=Chris Cillizza|date=January 19, 2010|title=Scott Brown wins Massachusetts Senate special election race|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> but another Senate vote would not occur. Scott Brown was also an excellent campaigner and judged to be a better candidate than his rival, Martha Coakley. He has since achieved one of the most moderate senate voting records, likely to avoid the anger of his mostly liberal constituency. After Obama made a promise to issue an [[executive order]] that would ultimately prohibit the use of taxpayer subsidies to pay for [[abortion]] services,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/22/nation/la-na-healthcare-passage22-2010mar22/3|work=The Los Angeles Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes historic healthcare overhaul|date=March 22, 2010|author=Noam N. Levey and Janet Hook}}</ref> the [[House of Representatives]] would pass the bill as it left the Senate 219-212, with 34 Democrats and all other parties dissenting.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-21/politics/health.care.main_1_health-care-entire-house-democratic-caucus-pre-existing-conditions?_s=PM:POLITICS|date=March 21, 2010|author=Alan Silverleib|work=CNN|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes health care bill on 219-212 vote}}</ref>

Amongst other things, the act mandates that the population purchase health care coverage or face punitive tax measures, and on this basis has been constitutionally challenged in the federal courts, with mixed results (three courts have upheld the act, two have declared it unconstitutional); thus, the Act is likely destined for [[Supreme Court]] reviewal. Plans originally proposed involved instituting a universal public insurance program, that is, extending Medicare to everyone. The universal mandate included in the act was originally a conservative idea that was enacted in Massachusetts under Republican Mitt Romney. Its supporters note that having health insurance results in reduced costs in paying for treatment of uninsured and forcing people to take responsibility for their healthcare. Due to ethical constraints, doctors cannot deny care to poor patients, resulting in the hospital and the healthcare system at large bearing the cost.

====Gulf oil spill====
{{main article|Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster}}
President Obama authorized offshore oil drilling in the [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0430/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-imperils-Obama-s-offshore-drilling-plan Gulf of Mexico oil spill imperils Obama's offshore drilling plan,] By Mark Clayton, ''Christian Science Monitor'', April 30, 2010.</ref> stating, "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills"<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref> and was widely criticized for his mishandling of the "[[Gulf oil spill disaster|worst environmental disaster]] in US history."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman Conscience of a Liberal: The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times'', April 30, 2010.</ref>

====Don't Ask Don't Tell====
{{main article|Don't Ask Don't Tell}}
Candidate Obama promised to repeal a policy that originated in the Clinton era that prohibited inquiries into military personnel's [[sexual orientation]] while also barring "out" [[homosexuals]] from serving in the military. [[Liberals]] expressed anger when time passed and no effort to repeal the law was seen;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/21/obama-to-delay-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/|work=The Washington Times|format=HTML|title=Obama to delay ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ repeal|language=English|author=Rowan Scarborough|date=November 21, 2008}}</ref> in fact, Obama's [[justice department]], as part of their duty to defend all laws passed by any administration, filed a brief arguing against the [[Supreme Court]] granting a [[writ of certiorari]] to a gay soldier challenging the law (the writ was not granted). In response, the soldier, James Pietrangelo II, a former Army infantryman and lawyer, said, “[Obama's] a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar. This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people."<ref>{{cite web|work=Time Magazine|publisher=Time Inc.|format=HTML|url=http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1903545,00.html?imw=Y|title=Dismay Over Obama's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Turnabout|author=Mark Thompson|date=Jun. 09, 2009}}</ref>

On December 15th, 2010, a bill was introduced in the [[House of Representatives]] to repeal the law - it passed a day later by a vote of 250-175;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll638.xml|title=FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 638|format=HTML|work=Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives}}</ref> it passed the Senate three days later 65-31.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00281|work=The U.S. Senate|title=U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> Obama signed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 on December 22nd.<ref name="g dadt">{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/22/obama-repeals-dont-ask-dont-tell|work=The Guardian|format=HTML|language=English|title='Don't ask, don't tell' repealed as Obama signs landmark law|date=22 December 2010}}</ref>

The [[Pentagon]] itself could not immediately implement the repeal and questioned whether it would hurt combat readiness.<ref name="g dadt"/> Senator [[John McCain]], the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, opposed the bill, saying "It may be premature to make such a change at this time and in this manner, without further consideration of this report and further study of the issue by Congress – for of all the people we serve, one of our highest responsibilities is to the men and women of our armed services, especially those risking their lives in combat.”<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/mccain-on-dont-ask-dont-tell-dont-rush/|title=McCain on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’: Don’t Rush|date=December 2nd, 2010|format=HTML|author=David M. Herszenhorn|language=English|work=The New York Times}}</ref>

===Foreign policy===
[[File:Western Wall Obama.jpg|thumb|left|320px|At [[Western Wall]], Jerusalem, 2008.]]
As Senator, Obama was highly critical of President Bush and promised change. As President, Obama has tripled down in Afghanistan, widened the war into Pakistan, multiplied drone attacks, bombed Yemen and Somalia, and started an undeclared NATO war in Libya. On presidential war powers, surveillance questions, Guantanamo, detention policy and habeas corpus, Obama has similarly stayed the course, or expanded Bush's precedents. In a speech on May 19, 2011 Obama fully embraced the [[Bush Doctrine]] of preventative war.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-news-in-obamas-speech/2011/05/19/AF4dFN7G_story.html</ref>

<blockquote>
The New America Foundation, which tracks the strikes, has listed 23 raids since the beginning of April, 2011, all but one in Pakistan’s tribal regions of North and South Waziristan. A June 20 attack was reported in Kurram, an area north of North Waziristan along the Afghanistan border.
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The drone program has become increasingly controversial as the Obama administration has expanded its use beyond the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Lethal missiles have been launched from unmanned aircraft in at least five countries in addition to Pakistan: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and, most recently, Somalia. The military’s Joint Special Operations Command used a drone last June to attack what officials said were two senior members of the Al Shabab militant group on the Somali coast. [http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2011/07/04/cia_halts_drone_launches_from_pakistan_base/]
</blockquote>

====Commander-in-chief====
By Obama's second year as Commander-in-Chief, 559 American troops died in Iraq and Afghanistan - significantly more than the 469 who died during Presisdent [[George W. Bush]]'s final year in office. And growing numbers of civilian contractors also have fallen. In the first half of 2010, 250 contractors reportedly died in Iraq and Afghanistan - more than the 235 military personnel who fell during the same period.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/05/24/114662/what-price-war.html#ixzz1Nz07pg5O</ref>

=====Afghanistan=====
{{main article|Afghanistan War}}
Obama escalated troop strength<ref name="pbs">{{cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamaswar/themes/strategy.html#ixzz1LhWNImZp|title=Obama's New Strategy (March '09)|author=George Packer, Seth Jones, David Kilcullen, Rory Stewart, Andrew Exum, Col. Andrew Bacevich (Ret.)|work=PBS|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> and defense costs in Afghanistan from $43.5 billion in George Bush's last year to $113.7 billion for 2011.<ref>Congressional Research Service, quoted in Gregory Anthony, ''What price war?''</ref> Adviser to General [[Stanley McChrystal]] David Kilcullen wrote, "One of the big strategic shifts is the use of language now which talks about Pakistan and Afghanistan as the same theater. Now we talked about Af-Pak long before the Obama administration came about, but the public use of that term, and the description of it as the Afghanistan-Pakistan campaign, sends a new message to people about how the administration is going to think about Afghanistan and Pakistan."<ref name="pbs"/> This became evident when, under the orders of Obama, a military SEALs team killed September 11th mastermind [[Osama bin Laden]] in Abottabad, Pakistan.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newsweek.com/2011/05/05/commander-in-chief.html|title=Commander in Chief|author=Daniel Romano and Daniel Klaidman|date=May 05, 2011|work=Newsweek|publisher=The Newsweek/Daily Beast Company LLC|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref>

=====Iraq=====
{{main article|Operation Iraqi Freedom}}
Obama campaigned on a promise to end the War in Iraq, however 50,000 U.S. troops remain in the country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-31/politics/obama.oval.office.address_1_iraq-requests-united-states-and-iraq-troop-surge?_s=PM:POLITICS|work=CNN|title=Obama: 'Time to turn the page' as Iraq combat mission ends|date=August 31, 2010|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref>

=====Guantanamo Bay=====
{{main article|Guantanamo Bay}}
One of Obama's campaign promises was that he would close the American detention center at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - detainees would be flown to other countries while the ones awaiting trial would enter the American court system. Two days after taking office he signed an order directing the military to do so.<ref name="salon">{{cite web|url=http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric|work=Salon|title=The Obama/Gitmo timeline|author=Natasha Lennard|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> But, in November 2009 Obama admitted that his self imposed deadline of January 2010 would be missed, and in March 2011 the president went back on his campaign promise, signing an executive order to create a formal system of indefinite detention for the prisoners.<ref name="salon"/>

=====Libya=====
{{main article|Libyan uprising 2011}}
In February 2011, the political unrest that had spread through the Arab world showed up as protests in Libya. Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi - dictator of Libya for 41 years - responded to the activism with a wave of violence.<ref name="nyt libya">{{cite web|url=http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html|work=The New York Times|publisher=The New York Times Inc.|format=HTML|language=English|title=Libya — Protests and Revolt (2011)}}</ref> The [[United Nations Security Council]] voted unanimously to impose [[sanctions]], and later authorized all members to take action to protect civilians. Obama, acting without approval from Congress and at the beckoning of the [[United Nations]], directed American forces to take out Libya's air defense system.<ref name="nyt libya"/> Obama later said, "[I]f we waited one more day Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world."<ref>{{cite web|author=Barack Obama|url=http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134935452/obamas-speech-on-libya-a-responsibility-to-act|title=Obama's Speech On Libya: 'A Responsibility To Act'|date=March 28, 2011|publisher=National Public Radio ([[NPR]])|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> [[Alan J. Kuperman]] - writing an editorial for the ''[[Boston Globe]]'' - suggested this statement was false, writing, "[I]ntervention did not prevent genocide, because no such bloodbath was in the offing. To the contrary, by emboldening rebellion, US interference has prolonged Libya’s civil war and the resultant suffering of innocents."<ref name="kuperman">{{cite web|author=Alan J. Kuperman|work=The Boston Globe|url=http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-14/bostonglobe/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions|title=False pretense for war in Libya?|date=April 14, 2011}}</ref> Kuperman, a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas who authored a book called ''The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention'', further stated that the rebels had tricked the world into thinking a bloodbath was at hand and that Obama had lied to the American people in order to act on this theory.<ref name="kuperman"/>
<blockquote>
Gaddafi [never] threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy’’ warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.’’ Khadafy even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.’’ <ref> [http://politicalcartel.org/2011/04/17/libya-and-the-obama-doctrine/ Libya and the “Obama Doctrine”.] </ref>
</blockquote>

However Gaddafi wrote to Obama:

<blockquote>
Gaddafi said he bore no ill will toward Obama. "We have been hurt more morally than physically because of what had happened against us in both deeds and words by you," he wrote. "Despite all this you will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the USA. We endeavour and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaign." The letter, dated 5 April 2011 in Tripoli, is signed "Mu'aumer Qaddaffi, Leader of the Revolution".<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/06/gaddafi-obama-nato-libya?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487]</ref>
</blockquote>

Critics point out the only thing worse than starting a "stupid, unnecessary war" against a madman is losing it.<ref>http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271847/war-libya-dumb-and-dumber-victor-davis-hanson</ref>

==See also==

*[[Political positions of Barack Obama]]
*[[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]]
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm]

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

{{USPresidents}}
{{2008 presidential candidates}}
[[Category: Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[category:Nobel laureates in Peace]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Obama, Barack Hussein}}

Muammar al-Gaddafi

2011-10-18T22:04:52Z

SeanS:

[[File:Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi in Dimashq.jpg|thumb|right|150px|"Leader and Guide of the Revolution"]]
'''Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi''' ([[Arabic language|Arabic]]: معمر القذافي, b. 1942) was the Head of State of [[Libya]] ultil the 2011 Libyan civil war. He rose to power through a coup that he led in 1969, and he has ruled Libya ever since. Once he became the leader of Libya, he renamed all the months in the calendar and published the Green Book, which was a series of pamphlets on democracy, economics, and sociology.

In the 1970s, Gaddafi attempted to assume the leadership of a pan-Arabic movement, a position left open by the death of President [[Gemal Abdel-Nasser]] of [[Egypt]]; however, other Arab nations mostly ignored him. He attempted to extend his influence in Africa by supporting [[Uganda]]'s Idi Amin in the [[Uganda-Tanzania War]] with military aid and equipment, including [[Tupolev Tu-22|Tu-22]] jet bombers. In the 1980s, Gaddafi became a sponsor of [[terrorism]] and President [[Ronald Reagan]] ordered a retaliatory bombing of his palace and key Libyan targets (Operation El Dorado Canyon). (In August 2003, Libya agreed to pay $2.7 billion to families of the 270 killed on board flight 103, when it blew up in December 1988 over Lockerbie, Scotland. Just six months after the settlement, Qaddafi was visited by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in Tripoli.) <ref> [http://www.nndb.com/people/641/000026563/ Muammar Qaddafi.] </ref>

In the 1990s, Gaddafi changed course and severed all ties with terrorism to normalize relations with the West. In 2006, the "decision of the US to restore full diplomatic relations with Libya marks the crowning success of his efforts to have his country accepted back into the international community." <ref> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3336059.stm</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> Full diplomatic relations with the United States were restored in 2006, and the Gaddafi regime's turnaround has been heralded by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a model for others to follow.

[[Nobel Peace Prize]] recipient [[Nelson Mandela]] speaking of the values he shares with Gaddafi, said,
{{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>}}

At present Gaddafi is not well seen in 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 "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".
[[File:Gaddafi and Mandela 1.JPG|thumb|280px|Nobel Peace Prize winner [[Nelson Mandela]] greets an old friend and ally, Muammar Gaddafi.]]
[[File:Schoolboys chant pro-Gaddafi slogans Reuters.jpg|thumb|left|300px|Schoolboys chant pro-Gaddafi slogans, Photograph: Reuters.]]
{{Clear}}
{{Cquote|
China is a different kind of competitor. It is a rising economic power and America is unable to stop it. It has an unprecedented human wealth. In addition, it is a nuclear-weapon state and a permanent member of the Security Council. Everywhere in the world, China is making economic, human and political inroads. Unlike America which unwisely has chosen the harsh military approach, China is making those inroads using soft power. America continues its brazen interference in the internal affairs of states in the name of democracy and human rights. Africom is a case in point. Such interference is no longer acceptable. America itself is condemned in the field of human rights. It makes a habit of taking losers as allies... America is aware of the danger China poses. [http://www.algathafi.org/html-english/cat_1_11.htm China..America..The inevitable Confrontation.]
}}

==See also==
*[[Libyan uprising 2011]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.nndb.com/people/641/000026563/ Muammar Qaddafi.]
*[http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/dictators/muammar-qaddafi/ Muammar Qaddafi.]
*[http://www.algathafi.org/html-english/index.htm Official web site.]
*[http://israelstreams.com/?israelinsider.html?http://israelinsider.com/Articles1/Diplomacy/4062.htm Gadhafi ready to compensate Jews who fled Libya.] Israel Insider.
*[http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/142593 Qaddafi is Jewish and I'm His Cousin.]

== References ==

<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT:Al-Gadafi, Muammar}}
[[Category:Libya]]
[[category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Africa]]
[[Category:Muslims]]

Muammar al-Gaddafi

2011-10-18T22:04:25Z

SeanS: at some point somebody should go through this article and make it more current

[[File:Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi in Dimashq.jpg|thumb|right|150px|"Leader and Guide of the Revolution"]]
'''Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi''' ([[Arabic language|Arabic]]: معمر القذافي, b. 1942) was the Head of State of [[Libya]] ulti the 2011 Libyan civil war. He rose to power through a coup that he led in 1969, and he has ruled Libya ever since. Once he became the leader of Libya, he renamed all the months in the calendar and published the Green Book, which was a series of pamphlets on democracy, economics, and sociology.

In the 1970s, Gaddafi attempted to assume the leadership of a pan-Arabic movement, a position left open by the death of President [[Gemal Abdel-Nasser]] of [[Egypt]]; however, other Arab nations mostly ignored him. He attempted to extend his influence in Africa by supporting [[Uganda]]'s Idi Amin in the [[Uganda-Tanzania War]] with military aid and equipment, including [[Tupolev Tu-22|Tu-22]] jet bombers. In the 1980s, Gaddafi became a sponsor of [[terrorism]] and President [[Ronald Reagan]] ordered a retaliatory bombing of his palace and key Libyan targets (Operation El Dorado Canyon). (In August 2003, Libya agreed to pay $2.7 billion to families of the 270 killed on board flight 103, when it blew up in December 1988 over Lockerbie, Scotland. Just six months after the settlement, Qaddafi was visited by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in Tripoli.) <ref> [http://www.nndb.com/people/641/000026563/ Muammar Qaddafi.] </ref>

In the 1990s, Gaddafi changed course and severed all ties with terrorism to normalize relations with the West. In 2006, the "decision of the US to restore full diplomatic relations with Libya marks the crowning success of his efforts to have his country accepted back into the international community." <ref> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3336059.stm</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> Full diplomatic relations with the United States were restored in 2006, and the Gaddafi regime's turnaround has been heralded by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a model for others to follow.

[[Nobel Peace Prize]] recipient [[Nelson Mandela]] speaking of the values he shares with Gaddafi, said,
{{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>}}

At present Gaddafi is not well seen in 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 "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".
[[File:Gaddafi and Mandela 1.JPG|thumb|280px|Nobel Peace Prize winner [[Nelson Mandela]] greets an old friend and ally, Muammar Gaddafi.]]
[[File:Schoolboys chant pro-Gaddafi slogans Reuters.jpg|thumb|left|300px|Schoolboys chant pro-Gaddafi slogans, Photograph: Reuters.]]
{{Clear}}
{{Cquote|
China is a different kind of competitor. It is a rising economic power and America is unable to stop it. It has an unprecedented human wealth. In addition, it is a nuclear-weapon state and a permanent member of the Security Council. Everywhere in the world, China is making economic, human and political inroads. Unlike America which unwisely has chosen the harsh military approach, China is making those inroads using soft power. America continues its brazen interference in the internal affairs of states in the name of democracy and human rights. Africom is a case in point. Such interference is no longer acceptable. America itself is condemned in the field of human rights. It makes a habit of taking losers as allies... America is aware of the danger China poses. [http://www.algathafi.org/html-english/cat_1_11.htm China..America..The inevitable Confrontation.]
}}

==See also==
*[[Libyan uprising 2011]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.nndb.com/people/641/000026563/ Muammar Qaddafi.]
*[http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/dictators/muammar-qaddafi/ Muammar Qaddafi.]
*[http://www.algathafi.org/html-english/index.htm Official web site.]
*[http://israelstreams.com/?israelinsider.html?http://israelinsider.com/Articles1/Diplomacy/4062.htm Gadhafi ready to compensate Jews who fled Libya.] Israel Insider.
*[http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/142593 Qaddafi is Jewish and I'm His Cousin.]

== References ==

<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT:Al-Gadafi, Muammar}}
[[Category:Libya]]
[[category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Africa]]
[[Category:Muslims]]

Christianity

2011-10-17T21:59:25Z

SeanS: Undo revision 929353 by Mrmadster (talk)

{{Christianity}}
'''Christianity''' is the world's largest [[religion]], having 2.2 billion followers on all continents. It is a [[monotheistic]] religion that professes belief in [[Jesus]] (in the Hebrew original, "Yeshua HaMashiach") as the Son of [[God]]. Followers of Jesus are called Christians, meaning "of Christ" or "belonging to Christ".<ref>[http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=2661&dict=CALD Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary]</ref> The early Christian faith was sometimes called ''That Way'', (Acts 19:1,9,23; 24:22), and its adherents were also called ''Nazarenes'' (Acts 24:5), evidently after the city of [[Nazareth]] where Jesus lived. The [[Acts of the Apostles|Book of Acts]] (Acts:11:26) records that "the disciples were called Christians first in [[Antioch]]." The title ''Christian'' is also used in Acts 26:28 and 1 Peter 4:16.

== Explosive growth of worldwide Christianity ==
[[File:Hong Kong Christians at Gateway Camp.jpg|thumbnail|left|200px|[[Hong Kong]] Christians at Gateway Camp. In 2005, there were four times as many non-Western World Christians as there were [[Western World]] Christians.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=30077</ref>
 
(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/mckln/4815046728/in/set-72157624550425162 Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/deed.en license agreement])]]
''see also:'' [[Global Christianity]] and [[Internet evangelism]] and [[Evangelical Christians]] and [[Resources on becoming a Christian]]

Christianity has seen tremendous growth over its 2000 year history.<ref>http://users.adam.com.au/bstett/BChristianIncrease12.htm</ref> Christianity has recently seen explosive growth outside the [[Western World]].<ref>
*[http://pewforum.org/Christian/Faith-and-Conflict-The-Global-Rise-of-Christianity.aspx The global rise of Christianity - Pew Forum]
*[http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=30077 Is Christianity taking over the planet?]
*[http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/The-stunning-growth-of-Christianity-in-China.aspx The stunning growth of Christianity in China]
*[http://gratefultothedead.wordpress.com/2009/12/16/the-african-apostles-how-christianity-exploded-in-20th-century-africa/ The African apostles: How Christianity exploded in 20th century Africa]</ref> In 2000, there were twice as many non-Western Christians as Western Christians.<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=30077 Is Christianity taking over the planet?]</ref> In 2005, there were four times as many non-Western Christians as there were [[Western World]] Christians.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=30077</ref> There are now more non-Western missionaries than Western missionaries.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=30077</ref>

In 2011, the ''American Spectator'' declared concerning research published in the ''International Bulletin of Missionary Research'':
{{cquote|The report estimates about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new [[Islam|Muslims]] every day, and 300 fewer [[atheism|atheists]] every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the [[Western World|West]], while religion is thriving in the Global South, where [[Charismatic movement|charismatic Christianity]] is exploding."<ref>http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity</ref>}}

=== Implications of the growth of worldwide Christianity ===

''see also:'' [[Global Christianity]] and [[Internet evangelism]]

Given the increase in the public's access to global communications, it is thought that the more [[theology|theologically]] [[conservative]] non-Western Christian churches could influence Western Christianity to move in a more theologically [[conservative]] direction.<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18774</ref> For example, non-Western [[Anglican]]s are exerting influence within the worldwide Anglican Communion against the stance of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Anglican Communion's North American provinces with regard to [[homosexual]] practices.<ref>http://www.maravipost.com/malawi-politics/district/5751-bishop-mw-anglicans-totally-against-homosexuality.html</ref><ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2156406/Anglican-church-schism-declared-over-homosexuality.html</ref>

== Main Christian Divisions ==
[[Image:Anglican Christ Church.jpg|thumb|left|150px|Anglican Christ Church in Western Australia]]
'''The three largest self-governing bodies of Christians are:'''

* The [[Roman Catholic Church]] (approx. 1.1 billion baptized members) traces its roots back to [[Saint Peter]] whom Catholics believe established their church and the succession of [[Pope]]s as the spiritual leaders of Christendom.

* The [[Orthodox Church]]es (approx. 300 million baptized members) trace their roots back to the Apostles, and are organized in Autocephalous national or regional churches in communion with each other. Differing theological perspectives led to the [[Great Schism]] between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches in A.D. 1054.

* [[Protestantism]]: the largest Communions are the [[Anglican Church|Anglicans]] (approx. 115 million baptized members) and the [[Lutheran]] World Federation (approx. 68 million baptized members). Protestantism has its origins in the European [[Reformation]]. It broke from the Roman Catholic Church under [[Martin Luther]] when differences over the nature of [[faith]] and works in the role of [[Christianity#salvation|salvation]], as well as other practices of the Catholic Church that Luther saw as unBiblical, were raised.

== Christian Beliefs ==
Christian beliefs [[Christian apologetics|are well supported via a large body of compelling evidence]]. Theologians, over two millennia, have debated a definitive summary of the Christian faith. While its interpretations vary drastically, probably the most commonly accepted statement of the faith is the [[Nicene Creed| Nicaea-Constantinopolitan Creed]].

Christians and Christian denominations agree on many points of doctrine while disagreeing on some. According to an online Harris poll from 2003, 99% of all American Christians believe in [[God]], 96% in the [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ|resurrection of Jesus Christ]], 93% in [[Heaven]], 93% in the virgin birth, 92% in the survival of the soul after death, 82% in [[Hell]], 50% in ghosts, 27% in astrology and 21% in reincarnation. <ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=359</ref> Note that the latter two beliefs are in opposition to the religious tenants of most Christian denominations.

Nonetheless, the Nicaea-Constantinopolitan Creed offers a general overall picture of what Christian theology looks like, and serves as a useful outline and historic standard. Other creeds may prove helpful in research. See the [[Apostles' Creed]] and the [[Athanasian Creed]].

===God===
{{main|God}}
God is a triune being. Though there is only one Divine nature there are three Divine Personages: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The three Persons are collectively called the [[Trinity]] or the Holy Trinity. While God is tripartite, this does not imply that Christians are polytheists. The doctrine of the Trinity is central to Christian theology, although several denominations that usually are considered Christian are non-Trinitarian. The God of the Christian is the creator of all things, is everywhere present, exists in all times, is transcendent, all-knowing (omniscient), just, and all-powerful (omnipotent).

A major theme of the Bible is [[love]]. In the Hebrew [[Old Testament]] the idea is expressed in the Hebrew word ''hessed'', which is variously translated as loyal love, tender mercy, steadfast love, mercy, goodness, etc. in the [[New Testament]] the same idea is expressed in the Greek word ''agape'', which is variously translated as love, compassion, charity, etc.

===Jesus===
[[Image:Jesus' Baptism.jpg|180px|left|]]
During the reign of [[Augustus Caesar|Caesar Augustus]] the Son (i.e. the second Person of the Trinity) took flesh from a virgin woman and was incarnated as a man. He was born in the town of [[Bethlehem]] and was given the name [[Jesus]]. At approximately the age of thirty he was baptised by his cousin [[John the Baptist]] and began to preach in the area of [[Judea]] and [[Galilee]]. About three years later, his teachings and works of mercy prompted the Jewish authorities to plot Jesus' death. Jesus was [[crucified]]. He rose from the dead and was seen by over 500 people. He ascended to Heaven. The four [[Gospels]] contain the basic account of what Jesus did and said.

Jesus summarized his moral teachings in two commandments from the Old Testament:

"'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." ([[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 22:37-39; [[Book of Deuteronomy|Deuteronomy]] 6:5; Leviticus 19:18)

===Morality===
The fundamental principle in Christian moral teaching is [[love]] and forgiveness, as expressed by the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and the New Testament. In the Hebrew [[Old Testament]] the idea is expressed in the Hebrew word ''hessed'', which is variously translated as loyal love, tender mercy, steadfast love, mercy, goodness, etc. in the [[New Testament]] the same idea is expressed in the Greek word ''agape'', which is variously translated as love, compassion, charity, etc.

There has been endless debate over how a person should express love for God in his or her moral behavior. This moral dialogue found expression in the New Testament, where the [[Apostle Paul]] addressed such controversies as [[circumcision]] ([[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]] 2:25-29), eating meat that was sacrificed to [[pagan]] deities (1 Corinthians 8), speculating about myths and genealogies (1 Timothy 1:3-5), and observing ceremonial dates and seasons (Galatians 4:9-11).

Regardless of a person's ethical interpretations, adherents commonly point to New Testament passages John 3:16 and 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 as scriptural depictions of love. The former states that <blockquote>"God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."</blockquote> The latter characterizes love, saying <blockquote>"Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things."</blockquote>

Jesus Christ affirmed, "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:35) In trying to understand the reason for the growth of Christianity in a pagan culture, it has been noted that while love of one's neighbor is not an exclusively Christian virtue, it appears that the primitive Christian church practiced it much more effectively than any other group.<ref>E.R. Dodds, 1970:136-137</ref>

In addition to sacrificially showing care for those within the community as well as to those without, (cf. Gal. 6:10) the Christians elevated the sanctity of life, opposing abortion, infanticide, child abandonment, suicide, and gladiatorial contests.<ref>Kenneth Scott Latourette, ''A history of Christianity'' p. 244</ref><ref> Ted Cabal, Chad Owen Brand, Paul Copan, The Apologetics Study Bible, 274 </ref> While the primitive church tolerated the existing and pervasive cultural economic institution of slavery in the [[Roman Empire]], the mandate of equal pay and just treatment (Col. 4:1; Eph. 6:9) greatly ameliorated the treatment of slaves, while advising them to seek freedom if possible, (1Cor. 7:21) and requiring that the escape slave Onesimus be received back not "as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved". (Philemon 1:6) The Christian ethos of love also motivated a great expansion in the building of hospitals.<ref>Albert John Ochsner, Meyer Joseph Sturm, ''The organization, construction and management of hospitals'', p. 17</ref><ref>Roderick E. McGrew, ''Encyclopaedia of Medical Care'', p. 135</ref> By 500 A.D., most large towns in in the Roman Empire had erected them.<ref>George D. Pozgar, ''Legal aspects of health care administration', p. 2</ref>

===Atonement===
[[Image:Dalí The Christ of St. John of the Cross.jpg|thumb|The Christ of St. John of the Cross by [[Salvador Dalí]], 1951.]]
Christians believe with the New Testament that the death of Jesus, in conjunction with His resurrection, is an indispensable event for the reconciliation of lost sinners with God. There are three elements they see to the understanding of His death on the cross.

- Jesus having the knowledge that His path would lead to his own death, desired and willed that that take place, and persevered in that path though there was opportunity for Him to avoid it. "I have power to take my life and I have power to lay down my life. I lay down my life for the sheep."

- Jesus saw that in His death there would be a way for people to be brought back to the God from whom they were alienated and lost because of their sins. This would involve a substitution of Himself to effect, i.e. atone for, that development. "For the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve and give His life as a ransom for many." How this would take place was not new to the Jews of His day from their understanding of contemporary everyday practice of substitute payment - as in redemption of the first-born (Pidyon Ha Ben), or in the understanding of what aggadic stories such as the Binding of [[Isaac]] implied (see [[Midrash]]), but it was not the prevalent view that the Messiah was to be that payment. Though while alive on earth, he had hinted at it in sayings such as "unless a seed falls and dies, it remains alone, but when it dies, it brings forth..", it was only after He had risen from the dead that He explained Scripture (the Old Testament) clearly about the necessity of His death to have taken place. The disciples would henceforth preach, and Peter among them, that the death of Jesus the Messiah and His resurrection was for-planned and for-ordained by God the Father, and foretold in the Scripture (Isaiah 53).

- Christians of all generations have looked to the perfect Atonement, and the hope for reconciliation, accomplished by Jesus on the cross, to provide the means of understanding the solution to the vexing problems of the mind and of life itself.

===Salvation===
The Bible teaches that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). This is often interpreted to mean that everyone has displeased God and is now separated from him in a kind of alienation and enmity that results from the fundamental conflict between selfish human interests and God's interests (Romans 8:5-8; James 4:4). Jesus offered a solution to this Biblical dilemma in that, by repentance of sins and faith in him (Jesus), their sins would be forgiven. He said that "...the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins." ([[Gospel of Mark|Mark]] 2:10) Jesus also said, "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mark 2:17).

Jesus Christ taught that "unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" ([[Gospel of John|John]] 3:3). Protestant Evangelical Christianity often uses the terms "saved" and "born again" to mean conversion, while other Christians, such as the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, use the phrase ''born again'' as a synonym for [[baptism|baptized]].

Christians are expected to continue living by Christ's teachings (John 8:31), as is appropriate for "children of Light" (Ephesians 5:8-10). Some believe that this is necessary in order to be saved. Others say that this is a common misconception of the text, that it refers instead to the "fruits" of saving faith. Christians in the [[Reformed]] tradition (following the teaching of the 16th century French lawyer and theologian [[John Calvin]]) say that salvation cannot be lost. One Bible passage often cited is John 10:28-29 in which Jesus said of his own Apostles that they could not be snatched from his hand.

== Resurrection of Jesus Christ ==
[[Image:Jesus resurrected.jpg|thumb|left|200px|"The Resurrection" by Carl Heinrich Bloch]]
The [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ|resurrection of Jesus Christ]] is critical to the Christian faith. The Apostle Paul wrote, "if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain" (I Cor:15:14). Traditionally, Christianity has believed in a physical resurrection of Jesus Christ.<ref>http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/crj0056a.txt</ref>

In recent history, Gary Habermas is considered a leading [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] for defending the resurrection of Jesus.<ref>Habermas, Gary, [http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/dialog_rexperience/dialog_rexperiences.htm Experiences of the Risen Jesus: The Foundational Historical Issue in the Early Proclamation of the Resurrection], ''Dialog: A Journal of Theology'', Vol. 45; No. 3 (Fall, 2006), pp. 288-297.</ref><ref>"Wildcat" and Holding, J.P., [http://www.tektonics.org/books/lichabrvw.html Book review of "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus"], 22nd June, 2004 (Tektonics)</ref><ref>Habermas, Gary, [http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/NTeSources/NTArticles/CTR-NT/Habermas-Resurrection1-CTR.pdf Jesus' Resurrection and Contemporary Criticism: An Apologetic] ''Criswell Theological Review'' 4.1 (1989) 159-74.</ref><ref>Habermas, Gary, [http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/crj_explainingaway/crj_explainingaway.htm Explaining Away Jesus' Resurrection:
The Recent Revival of Hallucination Theories], Christian Research Journal / vol. 23, no. 4, 2001.</ref><ref>Habermas, Gary, [http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/historical_apologetics/habermas-nt.html Why I Believe The New Testament Is Historically Reliable] (Apologetics.com)</ref>
Other notable defenders of the resurrection include: [[William Lane Craig]],<ref>Craig, William Lane, [http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/historical.html Articles: Historical Jesus]</ref> [[Lee Strobel]], [[Josh McDowell]],<ref>McDowell, Josh, [http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html Evidence for the Resurrection], 1992.</ref> [[Edwin M. Yamauchi]],<ref>Jamauchi, Edwin M., [http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History?]</ref> [[N.T. Wright]]<ref>Wright, N.T., [http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Early_Traditions.htm Early Traditions and the Origins of Christianity], ''Sewanee Theological Review'' 41.2, 1998.</ref> and [[Michael Horner]].<ref>Horner, Michael, [http://www.michaelhorner.com/articles/resurrection/index.html Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?]</ref>

===The Meaning of the Resurrection for Christians===
The fact of the Resurrection of Christ is also believed to produce certain effects on the lives of Christians.

1. It is because Jesus rose from the dead that believers now can resort to a living Savior to help and deliver them from sin and from situations overwhelming for them by their own powers.

2. The New Testament sees in the resurrection of Christ a certain vindication of what apparently to the world and to all beings was a failure and an overcoming of Him by His crucifixion.

3. The coming of Jesus back to life means to the believer that, indeed, his sins are totally forgiven. This is because believers know that His death was as a payment for sins - a "wage of death" for our sins that He received in our stead. If He remained dead, believers would know that the wage had not been fully paid.

4. It is a now-living Savior that Christians know can go before them, can closely lead them through life - as He did when He was on earth. This makes following Him practical and real.

5. The New Testament reveals that it is the Risen Christ who received from the Father the Holy Spirit and He, through Himself, ascended to the Father, has given the Holy Spirit to us. This gives the believer in Christ both the knowledge and the power to live a godly life and live a life that can be an intimately and personally directed one.

6. The resurrected Christ was no mere reassembling of the molecules and particles of the Body that had been crucified. It was, indeed, a physical body, but one that was fully glorified. It was a "spiritual body". Christians know that likewise, they will one day be granted the nature of a spiritual body, and be full of health. They therefore are full of hope and consolation, and consider that, even now in this life, there is an overcoming through Him.

==Evangelism==
In what is called the [[Great Commission]], Jesus sent his disciples out into the world to preach the Gospel (literally "good news") and make disciples.
:'''Great Commission'''
:''But the eleven disciples proceeded to [[Galilee]], to the mountain which Jesus had designated. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in [[heaven]] and on [[earth]]." Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the [[#God the Father|Father]] and the [[#God the Son|Son]] and the [[#God the Holy Spirit|Holy Spirit]], teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."'' --[[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 28:16-20 [[New American Standard Bible|NASB]]
[[Image:Gleyre The Departure of the Apostles.jpg|thumb|240px|The Departure of the Apostles by [[Charles Gleyre]].]]
 

==Internet Evangelism==

see also: [[Internet evangelism]]

Campus Crusade for Christ International (CCCI) is one of the world's largest evangelism organizations within Christendom and has over 25,000 full time missionaries. In 2006, Alan Beeber of CCCI predicted that internet evangelism will result in more conversion that all other forms of evangelism for CCCI combined.<ref>http://www.lausanneworldpulse.com/pdf/issues/LWP0206.pdf</ref> At [[YouTube]], Christians and Christian creationists have faced problems with [[atheist bullying|atheist cyberbullies]], but they [[Essay: Sharing your Christian/creationist videos on the internet|have developed methods to overcome this problem]].

==Early Church Community and Commitment: The Biblical Period==

The Bible records that that, at least initially, the church saw itself as united. In the community:

"...they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. {43} And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. {44} And all that believed were together, and had all things common; {45} And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. {46} And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."(Acts 2:42-47; 4:32)

This community was soon "scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles," due to determined persecution which resulted in the dispersed disciples going "every where preaching the word." (Acts 8:1,4) Christian communities were primarily to be found in two separate cultural and liguistic entities--the Greek and Latin-speaking empires of Europe and the mid-east, and the Aramaic speaking sphere of the Parthian empire of the mid-east and far-east. This latter sphere encompassed not only the eastern portions of Syria, the Arabian peninsula, and Persia, but also extended to portions of southern India and even China. To this day there are many [[Aramaic Church]] members in the Kerala province of south India.

==Early Church Community and Commitment: the Post-Biblical Period==

'''Justin martyr 100 A.D. - 165 A.D. From the "First Apology" (Defense)
'''

<blockquote>
But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to genoito [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. (Chapt. LXV - administration of the sacraments)</blockquote>

<blockquote>
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist = the Thanksgiving], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone... (Chapt. LXVl - of the Eucharist)
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead...(Chapt.LXVll - weekly worship of the Christians)
</blockquote>

'''Tertullian (A.D. 160 -220), an Early ecclesiastical leader and writer, in his ''Apology'' (response to pagan charges) in describing the early church community wrote, ca. AD 197: '''

:We are a body knit together by one faith, one discipline and one hope. We meet together as a congregation, uniting together to offer prayer to God. We pray for the emperors and all in authority, for the welfare of the world, for peace and for the delay of the final end. We read our holy scriptures to nourish our faith, hope, steadfastness and good habits. We hear exhortations and rebukes. We take such judging very seriously – as befits those who believe they are in the sight of God – especially seriously when anyone sins so grievously we have to cut them off from our prayer, our congregation and all sacred things. Our elders preside over us, obtaining that honor not by money, but by their established character. There is no buying and selling in the things of God. Though we have a fund, but not because people can buy religion. Once a month, anyone who wants to makes a small donation – but only he who is able and willing; there is no compulsion. It is not spent on feasts, but to support and bury poor people, to provide for orphans, the elderly old persons, victims of shipwreck and those in prison for their faith.<ref>Defense by Tertullian (39), Trans. Rev. S. Thelwall. Modernized, abridged and introduced by Stephen Tomkins. Edited and prepared for the web by Dan Graves.</ref>

'''Pliny the Younger, the Roman governor of Pontus & Bithynia (northern Turkey) from A.D. 111-113, reporting to emperor Trajan of Christians, whom such pagan rulers found intolerable:'''

:... Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ--none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

:They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food.<ref>Pliny the Younger Letters, 10.96 </ref>

== Resources related to becoming a Christian ==
[[File:Hoffman Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane.jpg|thumbnail|170px|[[Jesus Christ|Christ]] in the Garden of Gethsemane by Heinrich Hofmann.]]
''see also:'' [[Resources on becoming a Christian]]

'''Below are some resources on becoming a [[Christian]]:'''

*[http://creation.com/good-news Good news of Christianity]

*[http://www.thewordfortoday.org/?page=C2000 Free audio Bible and Bible audio streaming]

*[http://www.allaboutgod.com/ AllAboutGod.com]

*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]

*[[Video testimonies of Christians]]

*[http://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html Repentance]

'''Tips on choosing a Christian church:'''

*[http://www.allaboutreligion.org/choosing-a-christian-church-faq.htm Choosing a Christian Church]

'''Spiritual growth as a Christian:'''

*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9781576839324/The-Pursuit-of-Holiness-Jerry-Bridges The Pursuit of Holiness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9780891099413/The-Practice-of-Godliness-Jerry-Bridges The Practice of Godliness] by Jerry Bridges
*[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/529785.The_Complete_Book_of_Discipleship The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of Christ]

==Also See==
[[Image:Orthodox churches icon artwork.jpg|thumb|Orthodox Church's icon artwork.]]
'''Denominations or branches of Christianity'''
*[[Roman Catholic Church]]
*[[Eastern Churches -- Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East]]
*[[Protestantism|Protestant]]
**[[Amish]]
**[[Anglican]] ([[Church of England]])
***[[Episcopal Church]] (USA affiliate)
**[[Baptist]]
**[[Congregationalist]]
**[[Disciples of Christ]] and [[Churches of Christ]]
**[[Evangelical Christianity]]
**[[Friends]]
**[[Fundamentalism]]
**[[Liberal Christianity]]
**[[Lutheran]]
**[[Mennonite]]
**[[Methodist]]
**[[Pentecostal]]
**[[Plymouth Brethren]]
**[[Presbyterian]]
**[[Reformed]]
**[[Seventh-day Adventist]]

'''Disputed'''
*[[Christian Science]]
*[[Jehovah's Witnesses]]
*[[Latter-day Saints]]
*[[Unitarian]]

'''Other articles'''
*[[Essay: The earliest Christian Church, a prison in Armageddon]]
*[[Aramaic Church]]
*[[Cathedral]]
*[[Catholicism]]
*[[Christian apologetics]] (Defense of Christianity)
*[[Christians and the Law of Moses: an essay]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Church]]
*[[Conservative Christianity]]
*[[Eucharist]]
*[[Evangelical Apostolic Church of North America (Syro-Chaldean)]]
*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]
*[[Gospel reading in the Church: the Turgama]]
*[[Inspiration of Holy Scripture: An Eastern Christian and Jewish Perspective]]
*[[Jesus Christ]]
*[[Judaism]]
*[[Messiah]]
*[[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]]
*[[Passover Seder]]
*[[Persecution of Christians]]
*[[Red-letter Christian]]
*[[Sign of the Cross]]
*[[Essay: The Way of Salvation]]
*[[Gates of Hell]]
*[[Anti Abortion activism: a personal essay]]
*[[Transmigration of Words in Religion: an essay]]

'''Internet evangelism:'''

*[[Essay: Sharing your Christian and creationist videos on YouTube and the internet]]

==Further reading==
===Encyclopedias===
* Bodensieck, Julius, ed. ''The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church,'' (3 vol 1965), ECLS perspective
* Brauer, Jerald C. ''The Westminster Dictionary of Church History'' (1971), 880pp
* [http://newadvent.org/cathen/index.html ''The Catholic Encyyclopedia'' (1907-1913)], old but highly detailed and online
** '' New Catholic Encyclopedia'', edited by the Catholic University of America, 17 vol. 1967-1979.
*Cross, F. L., and E. A. Livingstone, eds. ''The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church'' (3rd ed. 1997), 1840pp; [http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Dictionary-Christian-Church/dp/0192802909/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b excerpt and text search]; online at [[OUP]]
* Elwell, Walter A., ed. ''Evangelical Dictionary of Theology‎'' (2001) 1312 pages; articles by over 200 Evangelical or Fundamentalist scholars
*Hastings, Adrian et al. eds. ''The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought'' (2000) 808pp; 600 articles by 260 Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox scholars; [http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0198600240/ref=sib_dp_pt/105-4292297-2766841#reader-link excerpt and text search]; online at [[OUP]]
*''New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge'' (1911), ), major sources of older scholarly articles; mainline Protestant perspective
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc01.toc.html Vol. 1: Aachen - Basilians]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc02.toc.html Vol. 2: Basilica - Chambers]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc03.toc.html Vol. 3: Chamier - Draendorf]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc04.toc.html Vol. 4: Draeseke - Goa]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc05.toc.html Vol. 5: Goar - Innocent]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc06.toc.html Vol. 6: Innocents - Liudger]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc07.toc.html Vol. 7: Liutprand - Moralities]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc08.toc.html Vol. 8: Morality - Petersen]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc09.toc.html Vol. 9: Petri - Reuchlin]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc10.toc.html Vol. 10: Reutsch - Son]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc11.toc.html Vol. 11: Son of Man - Tremellius]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc12.toc.html Vol. 12: Trench - Zwingli]
**[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc13.toc.html Vol. 13: Index]

===Histories===
*Briggs, J. H. Y., Robert D. Linder, and David F. Wright. ''Introduction to the History of Christianity: First Century to the Present Day'' (2006) [http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-History-Christianity-Century-Present/dp/0800638123/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200823548&sr=8-4 excerpt and text search]
*Gonzalez, Justo L. '' A History of Christian Thought: Volume 1: From the Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon'' (2nd ed. 1987); [http://www.amazon.com/History-Christian-Thought-Beginnings-Chalcedon/dp/0687171822/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200823941&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search vol 1]; ''A History of Christian Thought: Volume 2: From Augustine to the Eve of the Reformation'' (2nd ed. 1987) [http://www.amazon.com/History-Christian-Thought-Augustine-Reformation/dp/0687171830/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200823941&sr=8-3 excerpt and text search vol 2]; ''A History of Christian Thought: Volume 3: From the Protestant Reformation to the Twentieth Century'' (1987) [http://www.amazon.com/History-Christian-Thought-Protestant-Reformation/dp/0687171849/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200808706&sr=8-12 excerpt and text search vol 3]
*Horsley, Richard A. ''Christian Origins: A People's History Of Christianity, Vol. 1'' (2006), 318pp [http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Origins-Peoples-History-Christianity/dp/080063411X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200886474&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
*Latourette, Kenneth Scott. ''A History of Christianity'' (2 vol 1975) [http://www.amazon.com/History-Christianity-Beginnings-1500-Revised/dp/0060649526/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200823548&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search vol 1, to 1500], by leading Baptist scholar
*Latourette, Kenneth Scott. ''A history of the expansion of Christianity'' (7 vol 1939-1970), monumental history of missionary work worldwide
*MacCulloch, Diarmaid. ''The Reformation'' (2005), influential recent survey [http://www.amazon.com/Reformation-Diarmaid-MacCulloch/dp/014303538X/ref=pd_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200808706&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
*McGonigle, Thomas D., and James F. Quigley. ''A history of the Christian Tradition: From Its Jewish Orgins to the Reformation'' (1988); ''A History of the Christian Tradition, Vol. II: From the Reformation to the Present'' (1996) [http://www.amazon.com/History-Christian-Tradition-Vol-Reformation/dp/0809136481/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200808706&sr=8-15 excerpt and text search vol 2]
*Pelikan, Jaroslav. ''Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine'' (5 vol 1975-91) [http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Tradition-Development-Doctrine-Medieval/dp/0226653757/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201083460&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search v. 3, 600 AD -1300]]; [http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Tradition-Development-Reformation-1300-1700/dp/0226653773/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201083460&sr=8-4 excerpt and text search vol 4, 1300-1700]; [http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Tradition-History-Development-Doctrine/dp/0226653803/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201083460&sr=8-3 excerpt and text search vol 5, 1700-present] This is the standard history of Christian doctrine.
*Ward, Keith. ''Christianity: A Beginner's Guide'' (2008), 195pp

===United States===
* Ahlstrom, Sydney E. ''A religious history of the American people‎'' (1979) 1192 pages; classic history from broad perspective [http://books.google.com/books?id=5kFF6a1viGcC&dq=inauthor:ahlstrom&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]
* Balmer, Randall. ''Encyclopedia of Evangelicalism'' (2nd ed. 2004), 655pp [http://www.questia.com/library/book/encyclopedia-of-evangelicalism-by-randall-balmer.jsp ''Encyclopedia of Evangelicalism'' online edition]
* Lippy, Charles H. and Peter W. Williams, eds. ''Encyclopedia of the American religious experience: studies of traditions and movements'' (3 vol 1988) 1872 pages; standard reference work; long essays by scholars
* Noll, Mark A. '' A history of Christianity in the United States and Canada‎'' (1992), by leading Evangelical historian [http://books.google.com/books?id=VGF3wbzzy9QC&dq=intitle:christianity+inauthor:noll&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]
* Queen, Edward L. et al, eds. Encyclopedia of American Religious History'' (3rd ed. 2 vol. 2009) 1200pp
* Reid, Daniel G. et al. eds., ''Dictionary of Christianity in America'' (199)
* Wooley, Davis C. ed. '' Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists‎'' (5 vol 1958-19820; 2565 pages

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

==External Links==
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/christians/ What Liberals Say - Category: Christians], [[Accuracy In Media]]
*[http://www.christian.com Christian] Social Network
[[Category:Christianity| ]]
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Worldviews]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

User:CPalmer

2011-10-11T16:21:44Z

SeanS: Undo revision 926688 by NickCope (talk) Take it ot the talk pages

<big>'''Improving Conservapedia since 2008'''</big>

My first project was to concentrate on improving the articles on the [[Divine Comedy]] and related topics. I'm more or less happy with these now, though further suggestions are welcome.

I've also written a reasonably informative entry on the fine sport of [[weightlifting]].

And as if that wasn't enough, I've even been known to tidy up categories as well. The links that used to be on [[User:Interiot|Interiot]]'s user page are very helpful for this eccentric pastime - I've saved them [[/Interiotlinks|here]].

Any suggestions, comments and contributions are very welcome.

As of August 2011, I have blocking rights and also SkipCaptcha. If I can be of any assistance, do let me know.

== Page I can never find ==
*[[Conservapedia:Image upload requests|Upload requests]]

== My writings ==
I've written an essay on Jesus' relative emphasis on Heaven and Hell, based on Mark's Gospel. You can read it [[Essay:Jesus'_emphasis_on_Heaven_and_Hell|here]].

Continuing the theme, I've also posted a [[Mystery:Where is Hell?|mystery]] about the exact nature of Hell. All parties are invited to respond.

== Backslapping below==
I continue to enjoy interacting with the other users on Conservapedia. Accordingly, here is a list of ten of my current favourite Conservapedia editors:
*[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] - Welcomed me, and has sparked some fruitful discussions
*[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] - Has flattered his way back onto the list
*[[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]] - Tireless, low-key editing
*[[User:OscarJ|OscarJ]] - Another anti-vandal stalwart
*[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] - Could Sid be Conservapedia's longest-running basic rights user?
*[[User:Jduck1979|Jduck1979]] - Or could JDuck merit that crown?
*[[User:FOIA|FOIA]] - This collection of letters has been editing here even longer than I have
*[[User:Able806|Able806]] - And here's another long-running editor who took the time to introduce himself/herself
*[[User:LowKey|Low Key]] - And here's another. My, they are numerous.
*[[User:Benp|Benp]] - And another, although he now has well-deserved extra rights.

Please don't be put out if you're not on the list - if there is any unpleasantness I shall take it down straight away.

==Bible references==
One of the best things about this site is that Bible references automatically show the text when you put the mouse over them. Example: Ezra 10:22.

Temporarily unavailable, it would seem; but it is a good feature when it works.

== Praise for CPalmer ==
"I hope we can create a Conservapedia:Writer of the Year award, just so we can give it to you." - [[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]], Nov 2008

"I am declaring you an honourary WikiGnome for all your efforts in doing the fiddly things no-one else seems to do." - [[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]], Jan 2009

"Thanks for your [...] superb work. I've learned from your contributions." - [[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]], Aug 2009

== Favourite entries ==

*[[Physical appearance]]
*[[Gospel of Mark (Translated)]]
*[[Essay:Best New Conservative Words|Best New Conservative Words]]
*[[Conservapedia:Index|Conservapaedia:Index]]
*[[Conservative parables]]
*[[Emotional gambling]]
*[[Faith]]
*[[Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert]]
*[[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|Quantifying Openmindedness]]
*[[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|Quantifying Mental Strength]]

==Also==
Please excuse British spelling on this page.

==Footnote==
<references/>

User talk:SeanS

2011-10-05T18:14:15Z

SeanS: Replaced content with " <center>RETIRED </center>"

<center>RETIRED </center>

User:SeanS

2011-10-05T18:13:53Z

SeanS: Replaced content with " <center>RETIRED </center>"

<center>RETIRED </center>

Talk:World History Lecture Four

2011-10-04T23:55:25Z

SeanS: /* Early History of Rome */

Julius Caesar was not an emperor as stated in the Other Reasons for the Fall of the Roman Empire section. The highest title he assumed was dictator (for life).

:There are some factual inaccuracies about Roman History in this articles that I'd like to correct. And because I can't edit the page, I'll have to make them here and hope anyone using these lessons as study aids sees this. Let's start at the very beginning:
==Early History of Rome==
Rome was not ultimately founded by Greeks fleeing Dorians. The wording of the first paragraph is slightly confusing in this respect. It was actually founded by Trojans who fled Troy during an attack by Greeks (the famous 'Trojan Horse' incident). Aeneas received a message from the gods telling him he was to sail to another land and found a new city. After many years of travels (chronicled in Vergil's ''Aeneid'', he sailed to the settlement Latinum in modern day Italy and married a local princess. His son Iulus founded the city Alba Longa, where Romulus and Remus would be born. Their grandfather Numitor was ruler of Alba Longa, and their mother, Rhea Silvia, was a Vestal Virgin. Vestal Virgins (obviously) were forbidden to have sex, so she created a great scandal when she gave birth to not one but two babies. Rhea claimed that the father was the war god Mars, but she was nevertheless buried alive, as was the punishment for Vestal Virgins who strayed. Romulus and Remus were placed by their uncle in the Tiber River to die. But they were rescued by a she-wolf (and in some stories, a woodpecker) who nursed them until they were taken in by a Shepard and his wife. They later decided to found a city, but argued about the location and Romulus ending up killing Remus with a shovel. He founded the city on the Capitoline Hill, populated the city with outlaws, criminals and kidnapped women, and made himself the first king. Upon his death, he was deified under the name Quirinus.

:Rome was not conquered by Etruscans. The word conquered implies force, which did not occur. Etruscans simply assimilated into early Roman society, and three of them became kings (Tarquinius Priscus, Servius Tullius, and Tarquinius Superbus)

:The revolution that started the republic began when the son of Tarquinius Superbus, Sextus, raped a noblewoman, Lucretia. This was the last straw, and the people could no longer stand being ruled by kings. Junius Brutus and Lucretia's husband lead the revolution and began the first two consuls.

:The article claimed that Antonius had Cicero put to death. This is untrue. In actuality, it was Octavian who ordered the proscription of the famous orator, although most historians believed that Antonius put him up to it.

:People have already made arguments considering the whole "Romans did not believe in truth" thing, so I won't discuss this, other than to say I find it a baseless, irresponsible claim.

:Caligula (a name that means "little boot" and would have resulted in your immediate death if you said it to his face) was truly an insane man. He attempted to name his horse a Senator and operated his own personal brothel from the palace.

:Despite what it says in this article, Romans were actually quite tolerate of other religions. The people in the territory they conquered were allowed to continue their worshiping their own gods as long as they acknowledged the Roman gods as well. The Roman problem with Christianity lied mostly within their calling of Jesus as King. In Rome, the emperors were kings, and the Christian philosophy of considering Jesus the one and only king displeased them.
:And not worshiping the state gods, or any gods the romans recognized--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 19:55, 4 October 2011 (EDT)

==Intellectual Achievements==
''"The Romans are not known for their intellectual achievements."'' I beg to differ. By definition, the first 4 centuries of the development of Christian thought and the organisation of the Church were by Romans. The whole intellectual base for both secular and canon law that was to underpin society during the middle ages and last into modern times was Roman. From Roman poets and philosophers, historians, theologians, lawyers, we walk upon the shoulders of Roman intellectual creativity. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 16:41, 19 February 2009 (EST)

: For nearly 1000 years of domination, I hope you can come up with something more specific than that. In a fraction of the time the Greeks achieved infinitely more intellectually.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:09, 19 February 2009 (EST)

::Yes, they did, I agree. The ''Athenian half-century'' is unique and wonderful and completely unchallenged as a period of intellectual achievement. Beside the Greeks, everyone is left behind for so much packed into so little time. But we can't say that the Romans had no intellectual achievements. The work of St Augustine, of Gregory the Great, of Justinian, to name just three, have had as big an impact on European thought as Plato or Aristotle who did not gain much traction until the Renaissance. There are as many copies of Cicero, Ovid, Tacitus, Boethius, Marcus Aurelius, Pliny, Horace, Catullus, on shelves (mine anyway) as there are of the Greeks. The whole intellectual weight of the Medieval western church rested on a Roman intellectual base, in its organisation, its ecclesiastical laws, its language and, of course, the centre of its authority.
:::I am in no way meaning to denigrate the Greeks, just to argue that there is a recognised intellectual component in the Roman Empire that is alive today - especially noticeable in the development of the Christian Church and the Law. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 18:00, 19 February 2009 (EST)

:::: I don't think the Romans even had the concept of "truth".--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:07, 19 February 2009 (EST)
:::::Then what is ''veritas''? As in ''veritas vos liberabit''. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:19, 20 February 2009 (EST)
::::::I find ''in vino veritas'' to be a more of a "true" statement ;) An interesting article on ''veritas'' is [http://www.formalontology.it/veritas.htm here].--[[User_talk:Recorder|Recorder]] 12:07, 20 February 2009 (EST)
:::::::This inevitably depends on definitions of truth. Without wanting to put words into Mr Schlafly's mouth, I presume he is referring to a higher truth than the simply truth/falsity of a statement; this could be compared to the difference between 'faith' used as a synonym for any form of belief, and the specific theological concept of [[faith]]. Also the Romans of Augustus' day were very different, culturally, from the later, Christian Roman empire.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 12:19, 20 February 2009 (EST)

We have now moved away from the question of Roman intellectual achievement (which I say is great because, if nothing else, it is the foundation on which is built the whole edifice of law and jurisprudence under which we all live, no matter which oceans wash our shores) to one of the philosophical or theological import of a word. In both of them perhaps Andy should have made clear whether he was talking about Christian or Pagan Rome; and whether he meant Rome the city, or Rome the Empire. On the original discussion, might I just say that my life would have been poorer without the translations of Virgil, Horace, Catullus, Ovid, Cicero, Marcus Aurelius, Caesar, Pliny and Tacitus (all pagans) that have accompanied me at times through life. (And maybe I should add Plutarch who although Greek, lived within the Roman culture and wrote about Roman lives as much as he did Greek.)
:On the subject of truth, this higher truth, Cicero discussed it more than once. In "''On Fate''" he discoursed on man's use of free will and the role of truth within it.[[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 14:50, 20 February 2009 (EST)

:: Pontius Pilate, who was no dummy, had no understanding of the concept of truth. Can you quote something that you think demonstrates Roman appreciation of the concept of truth?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:17, 20 February 2009 (EST)
*''For nowhere does a man retreat into more quiet or more privacy than into his own mind, especially one who has within such things that he has only to look into, and become at once in perfect ease; and by ease I mean nothing else but good behaviour. Continually therefore grant yourself this retreat and repair yourself. But let them be brief and fundamental '''truths''', which will suffice at once by their presence to wash away all sorrow, and to send you back without repugnance to the life to which you return.'' (Marcus Aurelius.
*''For there is one Universe out of all, one God through all, one substance and one law, one common Reason of all intelligent creatures and one '''Truth'''''. M. Aurelius
*''One thing here is of great price, to live out life with truth and righteousness.'' M. Aurelius
*''Time discovers '''truth'''''. Seneca, Moral essays
*''The language of '''truth''''' is simple. Seneca
*''Enhance and intensify one's vision of that synthesis of '''truth''' and beauty which is the highest and deepest reality.'' Ovid
*''The first duty of a man is the seeking after and the investigation of '''truth'''.'' Cicero
[[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 15:59, 20 February 2009 (EST)

I'd like to learn more about [[Roman philosophy]], but my impression is that [[Ancient Rome]] was stronger in [[government]] than in [[philosophy]]. I can't think of a single Roman philosopher - unless he's more famous for his theories of government. It is rather [[Ancient Greece]] which produced the best known, most influential philosophers. [[Socrates]], [[Plato]], [[Aristotle]], [[Pythagoras]], [[Archimedes]], etc. (note that I include scientists because in those days science ''was'' philosophy.)

Anyway, [[Pontius Pilate]] didn't do anything to help Jesus when the Jewish leaders rejected him and wanted him executed as "[[The Passion (movie)]]" illustrates so well. My hero rather is [[Socrates]], who died for the [[truth]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:38, 20 February 2009 (EST)
::Ed, yes it was stronger in government than philosophy, but I don't think anyone here has tried to insinuate in any way that it had the edge over the Greeks, especially Socrates, in pre-Christian thought, but no list of great philosophers would be complete without Cicero and Marcus Aurelius to name but two. The quotes I supplied above were in direct reply to Andy's request for ''Roman'' appreciation of the truth. Bringing in Pontius Pilate - especially the Mel Gibson version - doesn't quite work. We know next to nothing about whether he was a fair representation of a Roman governor and whether any of them were chosen for there ability to philosophise. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 18:04, 20 February 2009 (EST)

There were no significant Roman philosophers, and the reason is obvious: philosophy is the study of the truth, and Romans didn't even recognize its significance. As to AlanE's list of quotes above, they lack dates. Aurelius, for example, was ''post''-Christianity. By his time Christian insights were widespread in Rome, though not official yet. Perhaps I should have been clearer: I meant pre-Christian or non-Christian Rome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:05, 20 February 2009 (EST)

*Yes, Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic philosopher whose Meditations were written in the late second century. Can we assume that all his beliefs were coloured by the nascent Christianity? It may be so, but not necessarily.
*Seneca, who died in AD65 was also a Stoic and is recorded as having died one Many of his statements are so "Christian" in nature that some have tried to insist he may have become so. He was Nero's advisor and did not live a Christian life. He committed suicide.
*Cicero died in 43BC
*(And one that didn't make it from my word document to wiki earlier was Ovid (died AD17) who wrote: ''Enhance and intensify one's vision of that synthesis of truth and beauty which is the highest and deepest reality.'' [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 18:44, 20 February 2009 (EST)

::The point is that the ancient Romans were known for conquering the known Western world and producing the civilization which [[Arnold Toynbee]] said gave birth to modern Christendom. They made notable achievements in engineering, and produced some famous writers on history and civic virtue. Andy's not saying they were dullards. But when you think about intellectual contributions, the [[Pythagorean theorem]] comes to mind (see [[right triangle]]). Then there's Aristotle's [[formal logic]], which 25 centuries later has not been improved upon in the slightest. "[[Euclid]]" is synonymous with [[geometry]]. I'd say the weight of the balance is largely tipped toward ancient Greece in terms of intellectual achievements.

::I have no desire to put down Rome. Instead of debating here (or ''merely'' debating here), let's add all the points we've brought up in this most fruitful discussion to the relevant articles. Remember, we're all here to learn as much as to teach. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 19:01, 20 February 2009 (EST)
:::And let's not forget their only invention....cement. :-) [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 20:32, 20 February 2009 (EST)

::Greek ... philosophy.
::Roman ... engineering.

::Euclid's ''Elements'' are as intellectual as you can get: pure abstract math. But how about those Roman [[aqueduct]]s? Enough comparing as to who was 'better' in which area. Time to start writing some paragraphs about what each actually did. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 20:53, 20 February 2009 (EST)
:::Once you've done one arch, you've done a thousand. An aqueduct is but an arch replicated as many times as the distance necessitated. The trick was getting the gradient right. What Rome was best at was building on the work of others. It took the innovations of the past and improved them. But it had the nous to take the philosophy of the Greeks and the Stoics and meld it with the new Christianity to make a Church that would withstand the tribulations of the centuries far better than its own institutions could hope to. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 00:23, 21 February 2009 (EST)

::Yes, after 300 to 400 years of (often deadly) [[persecution]]. Whether this is an intellectual or political achievement is anybody's guess. Can you write about the history of early [[Christianity]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:16, 21 February 2009 (EST)
:::Mornin' Ed. A big subject for a miniaturist like me. Getting the strands together would be interesting. I'll look at it but won't promise. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 14:23, 21 February 2009 (EST)

== Hagia Sophia ==

There is a mistake in the lecture... the Hagia Sophia was not built by Constantine the Great. He died in 337, and the church was constructed decades later, and not completed and dedicated until 360 AD, under the reign of Constantius II. This should be corrected in the lecture (I see some students in their homeworks even said that Constantine the Great is their favorite Emperor partly because he constructed that cathedral, which is simply false and misleading). --[[User:JKeeting|JKeeting]] 16:14, 1 October 2011 (EDT)

: Thanks for your insightful comment. I'll review this further.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:44, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

:: "Hagia Sophia was an early basilica erected by Constantine at 325 and restored many times since then." [http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/celinks.stm]--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:10, 3 October 2011 (EDT)

:::Your source looks somewhat dubious: I couldn't find a valid source for the date 325 - the year is important as Constantine summons the [[First Council of Nicaea]] in this very year. In the 4th century, [[Socrates of Constantinople]] said that Constantine II build it as late as 346, attributing it to Constantine I seems to be an idea of the 9th century, and propagated in the 12th century bo [[Eusebius of Nicomedia]].

:::Without any doubt the most iconic building - the current structure - was mainly built under [[Justinian I]].

:::''Constantine built a new Christian capital in the East for the Roman empire that would be safe from the German invaders, and he called it Constantinople.'' , I'd prefer something like ''Constantine chose [[Byzantium]] as a new Christian capital in the East for the Roman empire that would be safe from the German invaders, and he renamed it Constantinople.''

:::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:40, 3 October 2011 (EDT)

User talk:SeanS

2011-10-04T23:41:57Z

SeanS: /* Hi there */

<big>HELLO! :D</big>

[[User talk: SeanS/Archive 1|Archive 1]]

=Machismo Article=
I am sorry about that but you should have a look at this article then: [[pride]]. --[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 22:34, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
:I know what it is and I know what the Sins are, but they aren't biblical. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:35, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
::Ok. Are you saying that I should have named the category Machismo and Christianity instead ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 22:38, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
:::No, its fine. I was removing the 7 deadly sins thing simply because those arent biblical, they are sins, but not "seven deadly"--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:40, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
::::I'm sorry but I'm confused. What do you mean ? Is it wrong to say that those are biblical or to say that there are deadly ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 22:44, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::The sins are biblical. but calling them the seven deadly sins isnt. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:49, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Alright, thanks for the update.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 23:00, 19 September 2011 (EDT)

== Earthquakes ==

Can you have a look at the Earthquake article and the discussion about it on the main talk page? There is a claim that severe earthquakes are doubling every 40 years, which just isn't true. DavidZa and I have both demonstrated that the cited source is incorrect, but nobody seems interested and all attempts to fix the error just get instantly reverted. Here is a link to the actual data so that the reference can be checked: [http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/nndc/struts/form?t=101650&s=1&d=1]. --[[User:FindlayT|FindlayT]] 14:24, 21 September 2011 (EDT)

== Wikipedia ==

Sean, we don't copy from Wikipedia. Was your edit comment what you meant to say a few minutes ago?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:05, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
:Well, i didn't have anything to put into the article, so i took the basic info about the name, who they are and birth date. better then a blank article at least.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 13:22, 25 September 2011 (EDT)

::The vast internet has better sources than Wikipedia. I'll take a look at the entry.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:34, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Probably, but i figured I could trust the information I used. Better then the unrelated vandalism it was created as.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 13:35, 25 September 2011 (EDT)

== Accusation ==

In your edit comment reverting my last change to the election article you insinuated that I am a parodist. This is neither true nor in the spirit of a wiki. I simply reverted an edit made to an article Mr. Schlafly has expressed his contentment with. My personal views are not really in play here (they happen to differ from Mr. Schlafly's on the election), and I am most certainly not a parodist. Out of curiosity, what is your definition of a parodist? [[User:GeraldA|GeraldA]] 19:04, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
:People who come here, making a account and suddenly getting involved in debates they should have no knowledge about, people who say "long time listener, first time caller", amongst other more obvious things. You act like a parodist because your doing the second, if you aren't, I apologize, but you put suspicion on yourself by doing the edit you did.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 19:06, 26 September 2011 (EDT)

== PJ O'Rourke ==

Sorry, I kinda made a mess of creating that page. Thanks for your help. --[[User:LeonardS|LeonardS]] 19:58, 26 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hi there ==

Just checking. You are otherwise known as Mikalos209 right? --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 19:40, 4 October 2011 (EDT)
:yah? why.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 19:41, 4 October 2011 (EDT)

User:SeanS

2011-10-04T01:27:04Z

SeanS: "Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome."

Fear my userbox filled userpage >:D

*{{User Vandalized|3}}*

<big>'''GIANT BOLDED TEXT IN ALL CAPS!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!'''</big>

''small italicized text in all undercase!!11!!1!

"Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome."
~Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)



<big>'''I'm in my Freshman year of college so, I won't be available in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the Day''</big>--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! '''AA'''
! '''CC'''
|-
| '''AA'''
| ''AA''
| ''AC''
|-
| '''CC'''
| ''AC''
| ''CC''
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! Red
! Blue
! Yellow
|-
| '''Red'''
| Red
| Purple
| Orange
|-
| '''Blue'''
| Purple
| Blue
| Green
|-
| '''Yellow'''
| Orange
| Green
| Yellow
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Things
! Magic
! Science
! Religion
|-
| '''Storms'''
| Spells cast by Magi
| Water Vapor, electrical discharge and whatnot,
| God, possibly disfavor
|-
| '''Nat. Disaster'''
| Spells cast by a Magi
| Various causes
| God
|-
| '''Human Disaster'''
| Black magic causing chaos and problems.
| Various, usually Humans are Evil or stupid
| God, Demon, Human Will
|}

--
=About me=

*I love Astronomy, History, Video games, geography, geology, ect

I'm versed in the scientific views of the origins and of history (I don't believe it, but i find sciences story about how history went to be VERY entertaining and interesting)

I plan to teach history of a European variety.

I love video games, especially Japanese style rpg's.

I am a biblical, conservative non denominational christian

I'm Registered as a Non-Partisan Voter

==Favorite bible Quotes==

'''Revelation 21:2-4''' - ''2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ”Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”''

'''Ezekiel 18:23''' - ''”Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?”''

=userboxes=

{{User Christian}}
{{User straightforwardbiblereading}}
{{User windows}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User Youngearth}}
{{User NoEvo}}
{{User Donuthole}}
{{User American}}
{{User Not Obama}}
{{User Protestant}}
{{User Constitution}}
{{User patriot questions authority}}
{{User no death penalty}}
{{User anti-pot}}
{{User Soccer1}}
{{User Galactic Empire}}
{{User pubschool}}
{{User sysopother}}
{{User faveband|My Chemical Romance}}
{{User guncontrol}}
{{User antigun}}
{{User free speech}}
{{User nowar}}
{{User Interest}}

User talk:PeterNant

2011-10-03T19:30:52Z

SeanS: /* you should... */ new section

== "In Canada, most of the foster parents are on welfare" ==

Got a source for that? [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 18:07, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Perhaps that was a little bit overly broad. I should have said in Ontario. The comment that most of them are on benefits comes from a someone I know at the local children's aid.

In Ontario, to get a child from children's aid, you have to show them that you don't need the money to live on. That means either you or your spouse has a steady job, or you are on social services. In addition, its very difficult to meet all their requirements and work full time. This restricts the foster parent to either a stay at home mom with a working husband, or someone on some sort of benefits.

A single mom on welfare can make over 30K a year by filling the house with kids. Her benefits will not go down one cent. Its up to you do decide what to feed the kids, so you can rake in a fair bit of money by just cashing the cheques and feeding the kids kraft dinner. They get a clothing allowance that you can use to keep your kids in designer cloths.

Now if you are making 60K already all the hassles of fake accusations and paper work are not worth the trouble. On the other hand, you can be living large within the welfare community making 40K a year between swell-fare and the children's aid money while laughing at some poor stiff making minimum wage.

She thought they should move to more professional foster homes where the person was doing it because they wanted the kids, and not for the extra spending money.--[[User:PeterNant|PeterNant]] 19:00, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
:" The comment that most of them are on benefits comes from a someone I know at the local children's aid." So, not from a published, verifiable source, in other words. Thanks. [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 19:09, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

== you should... ==

probably look up [[Conservapedia:90/10 rule]]--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 15:30, 3 October 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Atheism and bestiality

2011-10-03T14:35:33Z

SeanS: /* Psst! I got a secret for you... */

==I don't even know what to say about this article...==
I was going to leave Conservapedia but when I see this kind of article, I just can't. Conservative, do you know that you are becoming very offensive? 
I heard that you were always eager to debate. I have a lot of questions about christianity & atheism that I would like to discuss. Would you be willing to answer my questions ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:56, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Is the reason why you don't know what to say about the [[Atheism and bestiality]] article is that I pick reputable sources plus have 6 pages of relevant information? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:06, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Then, would you accept my offer to debate ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:36, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
If memory serves, the Bible mentions and condemns this practice 4 separate times and it does so in a non-salacious manner. For thousands of years the Bible has been taught to children with very beneficial effects. Conservapedia also condemns this practice and points out it being mentioned inapropriately by members of the immoral worldviews of atheism/evolutionism which denies the existence of God despite the [[Christian apologetics|abundant evidence for God's existence]] and Conservapedia's article does so in a non-salacious manner. The atheistic worldview has a history of mass murder (see: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Abortion and atheism]] ). Question: Did Moses and God make a mistake by mentioning this practice in the Bible 4 separate times? If so, why? Also, the real issue is that the articles are further pointing out the immorality within atheism/evolutionism and Wikipedia and you don't like it, isn't it? If not, why not? Well, tough. There is no need to cater to liberal censorship in this matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

== Absolutely revolting. Andy Schlafly, please put an end to this. ==

Disgusted. As a Christian I am reviled by this. There are no links that support what this Peter Singer said, merely heresy from another website which doesn't state its sources. Then it is taken to paint a group of people in the same stripe. Absolutely immoral, unsupported filth. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:14, 22 September 2011 (EDT)

:What's next? '''''Atheism and mastur<nowiki />bation'''''? Oh wait, [[Conservapedia:Deletedpage|mastur<nowiki />bation]] is a naughty word - even the spam-filter doesn't like it. Bestiality should be added to the list! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 17:15, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::Yeah this is really bad, not that anything else this user has done has been that much better. -1 for lack of fatty fat fat ad hominems and lack of bunny photos. --[[User:MarkN85|MarkN85]] 17:20, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::: I suggest [[Atheism and Mass Murder]] or [[Atheism and evolutionary racism | Atheism and Racism]]. Oh wait, it already exists ! That's just great encyclopedic content ! And so objective by the way !--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:22, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::I saw your response and noticed that you started it off with "I suggest..." so I stopped reading it, but here's an article on flying cats instead. --[[User:MarkN85|MarkN85]] 17:23, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::there is no support for this claim - this user is trolling. Lowering the tone immensely. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:24, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::User:conservative is trying too hard--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 18:32, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::It was incredibly easy to find 4 pages of relevant material on this topic. Given the depravity of atheism this is not entirely surprising. As far as what is next, I have not given the topic or timing of my next article on atheism although I have alluded to [[User talk:CamilleT|an upcoming article on atheism]] to a Conservapedian. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:11, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::That is wonderful, when shall we see it? And Conservative, you state that atheists are depraved. I personally know many atheists and none of them are depraved in any way you have implied. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:19, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::SeanS, it is just useless, for Conservative loves to make up a rule from 1 case...--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 22:22, 22 September 2011 (EDT)

==Support ?==
Conservative, could you please provide some support that Peter Singer defends the practice of bestiality ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 18:38, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
::I cited a source plus in case you are forgetting you are on the information superhighway. I suggest going to a search engine and typing in the words Peter Singer. The reason I am taking you to task is that I think you are being lazy and/or contentious. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:01, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Please avoid being insulting, Conservative. I did actually googled it but I found nothing except from anti-atheists websites (like creation.com) which cannot really be considered as objective on this matter.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 22:15, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Please do not waste my time and second I don't believe you. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:30, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Oh you're right, that's just a waste of time. I forgot that Conservapedia is not a democracy, it's all about aristocracy: the king Andy who rules his kingdom seconded by his lords. And when Lord Conservative speaks, no one may dare oppose him. Thanks for reminding me of this.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:36, 25 September 2011 (EDT)

== Error ==

Where ever you copied this from, Conservative. There's a misplaced "2" in your Stalin paragraph (clearly should have been a reference).
There's also a typo in reference #11.
[[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 02:46, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Thanks, removed.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:28, 25 September 2011 (EDT)

== To Aschlafly: Unprotect request ==

As it appears you believe this article adds to Conservapedia's value as an educational resource, can you please unprotect it - and make sure it '''stays''' unprotected - so that the entire CP community can help to improve it? Thanks. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 21:57, 23 September 2011 (EDT)

== Extension suggestion ==

Could someone add the passages of the Scripture regarding bestiality (Leviticus 18: v 23, Leviticus 20: v 15 and Deuteronomy 27: v 21)please?
I would also suggest an historic part about bestiality in Europe (for instance the story of ''Leda and the swan'' in ancient Greek mythology) and how the rise of christianity helped to rid Europe and the world of bestiality. Or would that be a stand-alone article? À Dieu --[[User:VPropp|VPropp]] 14:53, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

Added Bible versus. Second, please create a section/article here [[User: VProppand/atheism-bestiality-Europe]] and focus on how/why Christianity helped greatly reduce bestiality in Europe and then I can add it. Also, if there is somewhat of a resurgence in bestiality in a Europe that is less Christianized and you can document it in a non-salacious way, then do that too. Please make sure you use reputable sources (not salacious sources) and I would prefer no pictures. Indicate on this talk page when you are done. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:17, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::VPropp, here are sources that are interesting and it relates to history: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7858632 and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19239958 Also, I can check back on this web page to see if you did the article. When should I check back? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:20, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

==Psst! I got a secret for you...==

As the author of this entry is quite fond of touting how prominently their articles show up in search results... one has to ask: why is [[User:Conservative]] purposely trying to undermine his/her own efforts? And by extension, Conservapedia as a whole? I am sure that the author of this very encyclopedic entry is well aware that most God fearing people enable the "Safe Search" feature so as not to be assaulted with any vile anti-Christian filth. Well guess what chief? With safe search on, the most popular search engine in the world filters out all pages containing the word ''bestiality''. So go right on adding that word to your feverish heart's content. But keep in mind that every page you pepper with your current favorite word, is another page that disappears from millions of search results. You're welcome. --[[User:SteveK|SteveK]] 22:51, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::Who said I created this article to get web traffic? Second, are search engines the only way to get web traffic? I have found that cognitive flexibility and logical thinking are not strengths of many atheists. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:39, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::What do you think is better access than a search engine ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:28, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::All God fearing Christians use the GoodSearch search engine to rack up donations for their favorite Christian charities and [http://www.goodsearch.com/search.aspx?keywords=atheism+and+bestiality as you can see for yourself] this article does quite well at Goodsearch. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:13, 3 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::The what? Never 'eard of it, nor have my biblical literalist conservative god fearing parents, nor my biblical literalist conservative god fearing church. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 10:35, 3 October 2011 (EDT)

== For what it's worth ==

For what it's worth, I do think there is something of an omission in all these articles, which is any examples of atheists who have actually committed bestiality. It's mostly about them not condemning it, which is unbiblical, but which I think is just as likely to stem from naivety (not having thought a great deal about what the practice actually entails) as from depravity.

Can anyone suggest any prominent atheists who commit bestiality as well as condoning it?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 11:01, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

:Another thought: of course it's relevant to cite the Bible, but fully half of the verses that mention it (two) recommend the death penalty for bestialters. Should this be mentioned? Do any countries currently execute for this crime?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 11:15, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

::I can't find any examples. To be honest I wouldn't expect many people, atheists or otherwise, to go around condemning bestiality all the time. Constant condemnation of a pretty rare practice seems to imply that you're thinking about it to a degree that's not... entirely normal. Anyway I've lived in the UK for 40 years and the only time bestiality ever gets mentioned is when people make jokes about the Welsh, so it would be fair to say it's not a big social issue here. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 11:18, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::re: CPalmner's above comments: If someone wants to do research on the atheist Marquis de Sade and the Oxford nihilist A.C Swindburne that would be fine. Here is what I found: http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/swinburne/acsbio1.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:20, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Also, I seem to recall that Conservapedia has a list of atheist killers/serial killers and my guess is that some of them may have engaged in this act. Again, this would require more research. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:33, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::That link says nothing about de Sade practicing bestiality and only says that Swindburne circulated a story about it; it also points out that he frequently spread untrue stories about himself. This isn't evidence. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 13:35, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Actually, I think the article says the Wilde accused him of spreading stories which is not the same thing. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::I know Jeffrey Dahmer was an evolutionist and he may have been an atheist. I don't know. He seems to have done evil things to animals but I don't know the specifics http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal_report/2009/03/john-coopes.html
:::::This website indicates that Jeffrey Dahmer was an atheist: http://listverse.com/2010/06/05/10-people-who-give-atheism-a-bad-name/ If memory serves, I do realize he converted to Christianity in jail. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:43, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Yes, but is there any evidence that Dahmer committed bestiality? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 13:49, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::The fact is that both atheists and Christians practice bestiality (don't even get me started on muslims) and what we need is evidence that atheists are more likely to do so. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 14:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
I was very clear that I said I don't know and I only have a report he did evil things to animals. You seem awfully defensive. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:I'm not being defensive; I'm just suggesting that if we want to suggest a link between atheism and bestiality it would be nice to have evidence that a higher percentage of atheists than Christians commit it. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 14:07, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Conservapedia:Community Portal

2011-10-02T22:59:24Z

SeanS:

<center>''This is the place to discuss issues of interest to the Conservapedia community.''</center>
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
[[Conservapedia:Community Portal/archive1|Archive 1]]
==How do I request/apply for upload rights?==

I would like to, in economics articles, to upload low resolution Bloomberg screenshots that demonstrate how the economy has actually gotten worse under Barack Obama. In my short time here, I have mainly contributed to economics articles, which is my speciality, including the featured article on the [[Federal Debt Limit]]. [[User:HP|HP]] 01:08, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:I would recommend asking at [[User:Aschlafly]] talk page. He will review your edits. Expanded user rights are granted on a [[merit system]]. See: [[Conservapedia:User rights]]. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:56, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
::I would like to request as well. It would make it a bit easier, as I have had requested images for articles I was working on and it took a while to get the first singer ones.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 20:14, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I tried for the First Lady articles and was told I hadn't edited enough. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 20:18, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
HP, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Federal_Debt_Limit&diff=prev&oldid=876420 this edit] is problematic; it looks like malevolent [[parody]] ("pervades the inner city culture greatly") and have advised Mr. Schlalfy of my opinion. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:51, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:Parody? You're kidding me, right? Nah, I call it as I see it. Obama does not take personal responsibility, will not take personal responsibility, and this is typical of the inner city culture, which is pervaded by a handout culture. It's funny how you insult my work when you piggybacked off of my contributions on the debt ceiling article and most of my work still remains. I have two MS degrees (Finance and Statistics) and my criticisms, even if you think they're politically incorrect, are factual. {{personal remark removed}} [[User:HP|HP]] 23:15, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
::Funny, Rob comments on the edit, and you return with a personal attack. You might want to watch that. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 23:19, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Rob, that wasn't personal, that was factual. It is factual that I laid most of the foundation for the featured article, which is not disputable. You then built upon this foundation with your upload rights and made it a featured article (for which you should be commended). But don't call me a parodist when you leave most of my contributions in the article. That is intellectually dishonest. [[User:HP|HP]] 23:32, 3 August 2011 (EDT)

== Blocking policy, RobS, atheists/evolutionists, deleting/oversighting and misc, ==

Here are a few comments for the record and a few comments:

1. I am not against improving CP's blocking policy and suggested a blocking review board [[User:Conservative/blocking-board-framework|HERE]].

2. In terms of blocking policy, I am somewhere between Karajou and RobS. Karajou is on the strict side and RobS is more on the permissive side. For example, I recently got someone on the liberal/evolutionist side of the aisle unbanned because their revision was correct on an article relating to a creation related topic.

3. Karajou and Andy are probably going to be more active than me at Conservapedia at least in the near future. Furthermore, given there is a lot of content at Conservapedia with multiple editors, I don't agree with all of Conservapedia's content. In addition, I don't agree with all the decisions that have been made in the past concerning Conservapedia which is not surprising as all websites/organizations make mistakes. With the above being said, realistically, if RobS wants to continue to be a drama queen and call Conservapedia a @$#%hole and refer to me as being "demonic" offsite (Is hissy fit, internet armchair "exorcist" commentary respectable behavior? No, it is not) plus engage in other unbecoming unnecessary tactics and drama, he is not going to get much cooperation from his fellow Sysops, from myself and from Andy. RobS is going to have to learn to be less hot-headed, show more self-restraint and engage in more constructive behavior. In addition, he is also going to have to repair some bridges in order to gain back trust. Already, he has lost his check user rights and his siteadmin rights.

Also, I had some strong words concerning RobS recently this was mainly due to his pestering me and his offsite behavior. If RobS truly believed I was "demonic" I am sure he would have approached Andy about this matter and his decision to engage in this behavior offsite shows his lack of conviction and it is merely a example of his hissy fit drama queen antics. The truth is that he didn't like being ignored by me so he shot off some hot-headed nonsense.

4. I have a feeling that if I do more in the future to get involved in blocking policy at Conservapedia it will be with someone like Iduan who I have had pleasant communication with in the past.

5. Evolutionist/atheist editors are going to have to be more realistic. Andy, Karajou and others are never going to allow the website to go pro-evolution/atheism or attempt to go neutral on these issues because they know evolution/atheism is nonsense and often just window dressing for people not wanting to live under biblical standards of conduct. There are a lot of other topics that they can contribute to and I would suggest covering other topics.

6. I feel no obligation to respond to or debate obscure atheists/evolutionists at Conservapedia. I am content that my material on these subjects gets a significant amount of internet traffic. Plus, I have responded to comments in the past and there are several pages of talk page archives. If more well-known atheists were to offer an attractive offer, I would consider debating them, but I am not going to lose any sleep over it if this does not occur as I believe they are often cowards (see: [[Daniel Came]]'s recent commentary about [[Richard Dawkins]] and [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]) and the fields of evolutionary biology/atheistic philosophy/secular religion and its promotion is filled with charlatans. On the other hand, Christianity has a great amount evidence supporting it and there is an abundance of websites offering excellent resources produced by scholars and others - see [[Christian apologetics website resources]].

7. I really don't fill any remorse about deleting vandalism or clearly inane comments in the past. For example, if someone says "Atheism is true because I say so" or posts some other nonsense that is often misspelled (public schools in too many cases produce atheists who can't even spell atheist, atheists and atheism) I can't say I lose any sleep in deleting it and I don't believe I did a great deal of deleting comments like these in the past. There is [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|no proof and evidence for atheism]] and as mentioned above there is a [[Christian apologetics website resources|great deal of evidence for Christianity]]. On the other hand, I have responded to atheists/evolutionists in the past on the talk pages of atheism related content and also taken some suggestions in terms of the content. I can't predict the future in terms of vandalism/malicious behavior, but with that being said I do think I will do less oversighting/deleting in the future. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:19, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
:*''I don't agree with all of Conservapedia's content. ''
:Why don't you just come out and say it: you don't like Andy's [[Conservative Bible Project]].
:Now, my question, who on the open wiki, or in private discussion lists, gave you the permission or authority to speak for all of Conservapedia in "Conservapedia's challenge to ...(fill in the blank)...."?
:*'' I am sure he would have approached Andy about this matter ''
:I beleive I did here. [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=888699]
:*''suggested a blocking review board ''
:You would need editors to man the review board, which you don't have.
:*'' I do think I will do less oversighting/deleting in the future''
:And I thank you for that. It's unfortunate this disagreement got as large as it did, but that's all it ever was about. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:55, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
[[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:55, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
::RobS, given that I posted concerning you, I read your above comments on the off chance you might respond with a sincere and constructive response. That didn't happen. Unless something dramatic happens, I don't see myself inclined to read your future postings at this wiki or to read emails sent to me from you. Second, if memory serves, I thought I had commented on the [[Conservative Bible Project]] (CBP) earlier at this wiki or at the very least commented on what is required to do good Bible translation/exegesis, but I cannot find it on the talk page of the project. As far as posting on the CBP, maybe I posted on the talk page for the main page or the talk page for Andy's user page. I doubt it was oversighted. With that being said, I do think I should post on the talk page of the CBP and point out what I see are the major flaws of the CBP in terms of its approach. Good Bible translation uses some of the same principles as good Bible exegesis and these principles are explained [http://www.godward.org/archives/BS%20Notes/Basic%20rules%20for%20NT%20exegesis.htm HERE]. If you click that link, obviously good Bible exegesis/translation requires a lot of work to determine original intent and it is also very methodical. I also don't like the name of the project and it will become apparent why once I post my objections to the project on the talk page of the CBP. Lastly, I have expressed criticism of other CP content and expressed my misgivings at various times. Other times, I chose to remain silent as I didn't see it accomplishing anything in terms of the content being changed. I do plan on expressing my misgivings about some CP content at a later time when I think it is a more opportune time. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:02, 8 August 2011 (EDT)

:::*'' I cannot find it on the talk page of the project''
:::Well, duh, you probably deleted and oversighted it.
:::*'' I do plan on expressing my misgivings about some CP content at a later time when I think it is a more opportune time.
:::We're all waiting with baited breath. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:18, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

== Rude and insulting behaviour ==

Could someone please step in here. I made a simple, polite and non-contentious comment and another user has sought to [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Atheism#Deceptive_statement_by_John_Calvert insult me and question my faith]. This is extremely insulting and it is not the first time the user has done this. I have given my soul, heart and life to Christ and for someone to suggest otherwise is saddening and offensive. No person should treat others this way. Someone please intervene and remind this user that they should not insult others in such a fashion. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:34, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
::Seems to me like standard operating procedure around these parts. You might as well complain about the sky being blue. [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 22:40, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
:::The same user has now taken to insulting me and questioning MY faith, simply becaue I disagree with him about the best way to oppose evolutionism, and nobody else seems to be making any attempts to curtail his offensive behaviour. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 19:42, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
Max you wrote at this wiki: "Thanks for your kind words. I am not a catholic I am afraid and don't think I'll ever be one! '''I have however found Christ! Turns out he was in my heart all along.'''" (emphasis added). Setting aside the Catholicism issue, this is not in accordance with biblical doctrine. Ephesians 2:11-12: "Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world." Unless you were writing unclearly, something sounds amiss. See: http://www.free-online-bible-study.com/become-a-christian.html and this http://www.godssimpleplan.org/gsps-english.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
::I am sorry my poetic language has confused you. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:37, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

==Discussion on reversion (from User talk:Jcw)==
Please stop reverting comments you don't like and calling it trolling. Valid criticism is just that, valid criticism. Are we (you) so thin skinned that any critical comment must be reverted? Keep that in mind. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:57, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:His last revert was to remove something vulgar, and the offender was rightfully called a troll. JCW will continue to do so as he sees fit. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:01, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks for the support, Karajou. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:34, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::Seems to be that those with blocking rights (i.e me, you, Jcw etc) are able to do what they want without repercussion. Are we trying to build a conservative community or just enjoy power over others I wonder...[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:21, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Well, exactly who are we blocking, and what do you know of him that is so vital we shouldn't be blocking him? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:24, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::I know nothing of the user, I just see those with extended privilages oversighting, deleting, blocking, harrasing and isulting others while being totally unable to respond to any criticism with patience, understanding and rationality. Not particulalry Christain. My Christianity teaches me forebearence, kindness and understanding which is what I see a lack of here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:36, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::That's right, Max, you know nothing of him, yet I and a few senior sysops as well as Andy had the displeasure of having this clown here. All you're seeing is "sysops playing the bully", yet you're not seeing an individual who refuses to change his past behavior, refuses to respect the site, refuses to change himself at all. Jesus did not tolerate sin; he told sinners to quit sinning. We're not going to have someone shove his way into the site and demand that we compromise with him. We're going to shove such an individual right back out that door with the demand that he change his own ways or go elsewhere. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:47, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Who are you talking about here, and can you provide a diff of the eggregious offense? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:48, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Just one of the many intolerant malcontents that you are so desperate to get back into this website. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:20, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::I'm sorry, Karajou, but you simply do not have clue what you are talking about.
:::::::::I have been explicit since day one: Conservapedia needs a coherent blocking policy. Conservapedia needs Sysop standards of conduct. Conservapedia needs a mechinism whereby real life persons who feel there may be incorrect information about them have an avenue to present their case. Unfortunately, you have helped to set a standard that eradicates any discussion of these serious issues which have plagued this project since its inception.
:::::::::And you can begin right here and now by ceasing innuendo, false judgments, and unwarranted conclusions about other [[good faith]] contributors.
:::::::::And you can begin constructively engaging in this discussion thread by simply providing a link (i.e., diff, or evidence) that was requested. Elsewise, your intervention here is [[Conservapedia:Trolling|trolling]], nothing more. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:56, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent) RobS, look up - this discussion was started by an editor complaining about another editor being blocked, but without providing any diffs. He later admitted that he knew nothing about the blocked user, instead making general insinuations about behaviour of sysops. It's not up to Karajou or me to provide diffs, it's up to the complainants. So far I've seen no evidence even purporting to show unfair blocks by me. If anyone shows any, I'll gladly address it. I'd also like you to address the fact that you seem to be working to help these trolls and parodists against CP. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::Jcw, thank you for responding; this is indeed a discussion on ''reversion'', not blocking. The request was for a diff on, what Karajou refered to as, "a vulgar" comment. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:43, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I can't say which case Karajou has in mind, as no usernames were mentioned by the editor who began this discussion, but it may have been one of the many Horace socks we've had recently. They all left similar comments on various talk pages futilely begging for an intransigent troll to be unblocked. I'm sure you'll agree that those comments were intended only to sow discord and start arguments - that's how trolls operate. By getting involved in this inconsequential affair, you're giving them exactly what they want - discord on CP. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:48, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::So, there is essentially no checks on a sysops conduct. They can act arbitrarily with impugnity. As to reverts, it would be nice if (a) only the most eggregious, outrageuos, over the top, off-topic, intended to disrupt talk page edits we're ''immediately'' reverted; (b) a reverting editor would look, first, to see if the editor was actively involved in an ongoing discussion, particularly where ''other'' editors are involved, and particularly if a sysop or other editor with enhanced user rights are involved with the editor whose comments are being reverted. The net effect has been, and User:Karajou & User:Conservative are guilty of this, of '''disrupting''' ongoing discussions. Not everyone is present in real time in any discussion. If an editor makes an incivil, disruptive, or off-topic comment, the editor should be politely warned, either in the context of the active discussion, or on his/her user page, about a possible infraction. If the comment demands an immediate time-out, care should be taken to place the personal remark template and '''''not''''' disrupt the ''other'' editors who are involved in a discussion. Way too often, editors who in no way are involved in a discussion, show no concern whatsoever to ''other'' editors ''who are not complaining about the behavior of a participant, and totally disrupt an active discussion. This is extremely upsetting to all participants in a discussion, and rude behavior from sysops and blocking editors as well. Show some concern, some sensibility, to others, please''. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:45, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Max, your comments are way out of line. I'll be happy to hear complaints, but so far you're just throwing around insinuations. Critical comment has always been welcome on CP, but lots of trolls come here for no reason other than to make arguments. That sort of thing can't be tolerated; nor can uncivil or argumentative comments. Your own post above is undeniably argumentative in tone - if you can't express yourself civilly, how can you expect to be heeded? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:34, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::I have never been incivil on Conservapedia, not once and not to anyone. A look through my edits will show as much - I can hold my head high. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:36, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Calling people 'thin skinned' isn't terribly civil, and ending your first post with 'Keep that in mind.' can only be called peremptory. That's not really the point though - you admit above that you don't have any idea why this user was blocked or have anything to say in his defense, yet you come here and accuse us of 'harassing' people. From where you're standing it might look that way, but why not treat us with some forbearance and understanding? There are large numbers of liberal vandals who actively plot to undermine this project, so naturally we block a lot of new users - anyone who makes a new account and immediately starts arguing about the vandals' favourite points is clearly a troll, so why try to reason with the unreasonable? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:45, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::You and Karajou make good points...about blocking! I think reverting anything other than obscenity rather than actually addressing and blowing the complaints out of the water with a reasoned argument is why I made the "thin skinned" comment. I have skin like rock which means I never need to revert anyone because nothing gets to me! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::Sorry to butt in here, JCW, but it seems as if editors with blocking privileges are being indicted as a whole, so I'll add my two cents.
:::::Max, here's the thing: some things just don't belong here, and those things go beyond simple obscenity (although that's certainly one example.) Libelous comments, for example, do not belong here. Nor do endless debates that aren't going to be productive. When someone comes here to argue over why liberal ideas aren't portrayed more sympathetically, that's simply wasting time and space. Conservapedia makes no secret of the fact that it's a conservative site. We don't portray liberal ideas more sympathetically because they're bad ideas, plain and simple.
:::::It's a bit like dealing with telemarketers. You try to be polite at first and say "Thank you, we're not interested," and they persist. You say it again, more firmly, and STILL they persist. How long should you allow them to continue before simply saying "Goodbye" and hanging up on them? It's undoubtedly rude, but so's not taking "no" for an answer. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 20:58, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Yes, you're all to be commended. The POV that conservatives are closed minded snobs, and suspected liberal trolls are to be banhammered from the git-go because they might say something witty and catch us off guard and make us look stupid is the watchword. Go to it. STOMP STOMP STOMP. Make sure this community never grows. Karajou blocked a fellow just cause he claimed CP said something unfair in his biographical scetch. We can have none of that. Reason? Fairness? Forget it. They're all trolls, including anybody who complains about CP's lack of accountability. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:57, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I agree with Rob on this - I have been sneered at, jeered by and had my faith, '''my faith''', questioned by a CP sysop. I have no doubts that any other user would have been banned immediately. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:03, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::::::How can we NOT question, Max? When you consider the number of people who come here proclaiming to be dyed-in-the-wool conservatives and Christians, only to turn around and vandalize the site, it's difficult not to be paranoid. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, personally, but there have been more times than I care to remember where I've given someone said benefit and then looked like a gullible fool when they went on a vandalism spree shortly afterwards. Now, you seem like a sincere enough person to me, and I'm willing to take you at your word--but I don't spend nearly as much time here dealing with wave after wave of parodists and vandals as the sysops or some of the other editors. I suspect that if I did, I might be a lot more suspicious and (as you put it) thin-skinned. In any event, I don't want to fill up JCW's talk page with third-party discussion...but do try to see it from our position, if you would. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:38, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::''but do try to see it from our position'' "our" is also "me" because I am just as much a user as everybody else. But more to the point I have been here awhile now (can't remember exactly when) and i am demonstrably a good faith user. Andy has promoted me twice and I have been polite, candid and have also ushered vandals out. So I do understand your position because I am in it! My faith was questioned simple because I asked some basic questions. It is extremely offensive and I have no doubt if I were to call into question Karajou's faith, for example, I would be quickly shown the door. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:44, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::Might I suggest, if similiar behavior were to occur from a CP Sysop in the future, remind them [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Civility]] states,
:::::::::::*''Conservapedia Administrators as well need to interact with others according to the same standards of civility we ask of editors,''
::::::::::::and [[Conservapedia:Administrator%27s_Guide#Civility|Conservapedia:Administrator's Guide#Civility]] states,
:::::::::::*''Conservapedia Administrators are expected to afford registered users the same standard of editing etiquette, decorum, and interaction you yourself, and the Conservapedia project as a whole, require and appreciate from others. You must be civil. No bullying.'' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:06, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

==a perspective from a pianist==
MaxFletcher and RobSmith both bring up some excellent points, which certain sysops would do well to listen to rather than dismiss out of hand. In my own experience, I've also had my integrity, goodwill, and even faith belligerently questioned numerous times on this site for daring to disagree on the smallest matters of detail in relatively benign articles -- I never even touched the more ideological corners of the site. The first few times this happened, I fought back; the personal nature of the attacks which some sysops past and present have engaged in and continuously engage in as ''modus operandi'' is hard to take lightly. Naturally, in the power dynamics of this wiki a sysop is allowed to personally attack a lowly editor with impunity, but any talkback from the attacked editor is worthy of a stiff block; my own logs reflect this fact. After this cycle had happened several times, I learned to be more, well, Christian about the whole matter, and to repay brutish speculation with an attitude of somewhat bemused grace.

But the bottom line is, I originally came here to help build an educational resource. My contributions, beginning in early 2009, are the best evidence of that. Now, it's hard to see the point. Conservapedia has simply not progressed as an educational resource in the last two years. The only "original" content consists either of high-profile projects so extreme as to be rejected by the mainsream conservative community, or nonsensical "parody" pages which form their own small feedback loop (since for whatever reason their author does not welcome suggestion or comment). The core elements of any encyclopedia are still sorely lacking, since this site has a way of driving off people who actually know what they're writing about. It has essentially been reduced to a collection of fiefdoms owned by the small pool of sysops left. The sysop "community," if you can even call it that, has been fighting amongst itself in the ugliest, pettiest possible way. Obvious abuses are going on as a result of this fight between Conservative, RobSmith, and Karajou, with several innocent users being blocked for no reason other than as some sort of bizarre collateral damage. Most disappointing has been the absence of leadership in this from Andy, as he's the only one who could have defused this conflict.

My whole time here, I've heard it argued, "well, we're a 'conservative' project, and anyone editing here has to accept our zero-tolerance policy towards liberalism." In that case, I do not see why this project remains run as a wiki, when the editorial wishes of its administrators would be better served by the much simpler blog software. After all, on a blog you can moderate, delete, or even disallow reader comments, you can fix all of your errors without leaving a trace, and you don't have to put up with anyone changing or haggling over what you write. The wiki software was designed with goals diametrically opposed to this, namely to encourage transparency and collaboration, what Andy would call "the best of the public," and this guiding philosophy behind the wiki idea can only be subverted by clumsy abuse of some of its tools. Unfortunately, this is exactly what happens at Conservapedia with alarming frequency. You can object, revert, and engage in silly block wars with RobSmith all you want, but you ignore his attempts to instill sysop accountability at your own peril.

My two cents, for what it's worth. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 17:02, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Thank you JDW for your well thought out comments and I'd like to echo your position. This is, at its base, a conservative encyclopedia and, as such, should not accept liberal positions in its main-space. It also deals with religion and science. Now, not all religious perspectives are the same. I am a Christian but I don't inject it into my politics (as politics, in my view, is a human affair) nor into how I view the age of the earth (because it simply isn't relevant to me). But because of the non-relevence of creationism to me I have been jeered at and accused of being an atheist. All because I simply pointed out to User:Conservative that his 15 question had been answered and I was curious about why he keeps saying they haven't. He calls them "faux" answers but refuses to elaborate on what that means. I have been insulted for merely asking simple questions and had my comments deleted. This is why I originally posted on Jcw's page because I saw the wholesale deletion of comments which I thought was unfair - granted I didn't know the user was apparently a long-term troll but to say it was vulgar when I have had worse vulgarities directed to me by a sysop I found the whole thing curious and wanted to draw attention to what I viewed as a double standard. As to the Rob vs. Karajou: I have no opinion. Neither of these users seem right or wrong and both have treated me with fairness so I won't get into that debate. Mainly I want to see leadership, responsibility, and fairness from all users. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:19, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

::This has taken rather a tangent from the original discussion. In fact, JDW and Max seem to have taken the opportunity to return to an old saw by having yet another dig at Conservative while ignoring the point of this thread. If you don't like Conservative's Evolution article, make your own in your userspace and build a consensus on it; going on and on about your dislike of a sysop is not a productive way to spend your time. Meanwhile we'll carry on keeping the trolls at bay. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:27, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::You have completely missed the point I am afraid. I have never even read the Evolution article! I never mentioned I disliked anyone either. I dislike having my faith questioned and my simple questions rebutted with childish accusations. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::(edit conflict) Sorry, Jcw, but I have to agree with JDW and Max. I'm not sure if you were around at the time, but more than one sysop has routinely ignored the guidelines and chosen to block users and IP ranges on a personal whim. In each case they were revealed to be liars and parodists. This '''is''' a Conservative and Christian wiki, so there should be no problem in everyone - including the sysops - obeying basic rules. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 17:31, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::I didn't miss that point, I ignored it. If you want to complain about the behavior of sysops, there's a proper way to do it. Inserting these serious accusations against a senior sysop into an unrelated discussion is extremely unhelpful. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:33, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::No, there is not now an established, proper way to complain about sysop misconduct. This is another example of CP's stunted growth. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:59, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::So you ignored the main thrust of what I was saying and made a totally unrelated point and argued I was wrong? That is called a strawman. Secondly these are not "serious accusations" these are ''facts''. [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Atheism#Deceptive_statement_by_John_Calvert Here conservative questions my faith] and this is but one page and [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#S._Africa_and_Question_Evolution.21_campaign_-_Everything_you_post_must_be_true_and_verifiable here again he displays open hostility towards me] for asking simple questions. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:38, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::My point, to re-clarify '''again''' is that vulgar statements from one person is treated differently from those of a sysop. I am not taking a "dig at conservative" i am using him as an example. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:39, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I would agree with this assessment, questioning a persons professed religious faith is vulgar. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:03, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Coming from the man who didn't have the evidence (nor chutzpah) to call me "demonic" at this website and resorted to posting his allegation at a cesspool website, I find RobS's comment rather amusing. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:35, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent)Max, please pause and consider what you're saying and where you're saying it. This thread has nothing to do with Conservative or with how sysops talk to editors; it's about me blocking someone. That question has been settled now, and Conservative never entered into it. If you'd like to criticize him, please do it elsewhere. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:You keep introducing strawmen. No, it was never about blocking - it was about reverting which I have clarified twice: my initial comment was "Please stop reverting comments you don't like and calling it trolling. Valid criticism is just that, valid criticism. Are we (you) so thin skinned that any critical comment must be reverted? Keep that in mind." Now I am trying to point out that vulgar comments have been directed at me by those in a sysop position so we needs blanket civility standards that apply to all - what would happen I started reverting conservatives rude comments towards me? Would I be banned? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:51, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Moved from above. If you must continue in this vein, do it here. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:57, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:I have removed your dishonest section title. Don't put words in my mouth. I am talking civility here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:00, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

(EC) I made this a section of its own, to allow for a broader discussion. IMO the most important point mentioned by the pianist is
:'''Most disappointing has been the absence of leadership in this from Andy, as he's the only one who could have defused this conflict.'''
But that's only me: instead of Andy's guidance we have a couple of sysops who all claim that they act according to his wishes, or perhaps with his silent support. The only action taken by Andy over the last couple of days was to revoke some of RobSmith's rights. It's left to the augurs to interpret these signs... [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 18:01, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Agree with RonLar. I do not wish to snipe with you Jcw, lets us mend our rift.. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:04, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

==And end to this==

Max: I don't want to snipe with you either, or with anyone. All I'm trying to do is prevent the kind of heated argument that hurts this site and brings joy to the parodists. As you've no doubt inferred already, I'm not prepared to discuss Conservative's editing style - it's far above my station to do so. If you'd like to do that, please do, but do it somewhere appropriate - a fresh thread on this page, for example. However, I ask you for your own good and that of the site to consider your words very carefully and avoid anything that might inflame tempers or provide grist for the trolls' mills. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 18:17, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

== TracyS edits from the same IP address as RobS ==

TracyS edits from the same IP address as RobS. No wonder why TracyS was such a loser. Once again, RobS, "the greatest lawgiver and rule giver since Moses and Hammurabi", is breaking a Conservapedia rule. Way to stay on top of check user Karajou. It looks like RobS keeps slipping further down the moral high ground. First, he removes the protection from my "castle" and now this. Tsk. tsk. tsk. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:01, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

:May I draw you attention to [[Conservapedia:Proxy IP]]? For someone who thinks that he can keep his gender a mystery you are jumping utterly fast to conclusions about others! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 07:39, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::They have the same IP address. I can point out many things, but I will point out another thing. Both RobS and TracyS had an inordinate interest in my user page talk page layout despite Conservapedia saying a user's talk page is his/her castle. That was the clincher for me in terms of TracyS being a product of Rob's socketpuppetry. If only RobS had chosen not to pester me. I wonder if RobS pokes sleeping dogs and then complains if they bite him. Many of RobS's self-imposed problems could have been avoided merely by the absence of "pesterfesting".[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:10, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

::*You're articles are quite noticeable, so many (including me) have an interest to talk to you
::*You make a farce out of Conservapedia's saying that ''a user's talk page is his/her castle'': the main intention of a talk page is to allow for communication. This communication can be moderated - in Conservapedia's case ''heavily'' moderated by the user. Your treatment of your talk page doesn't further communication...
::*RobS was pestering you? *LOL*
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:36, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RobSmith relies on proxies because his personal web connection has trouble with Conservapedia.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 12:27, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::So do a lot of vandals, but in this case there's more than a dozen individually-named socks. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:29, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::The fact that there are many accounts created from an open proxy fails to persuade that Rob = Tracy. Did Rob also use the same Canadian proxies Tracy used? Did Rob ever edit from the same Kansas City IP? In combination, that might be more compelling. Then again, do Conservapedia administrators need to persuade anyone but themselves to act? [[User:BradB|BradB]] 12:45, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::And how do you know a Canadian proxy was used? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:53, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That is an excellent question. I can't see how he can know unless he's a sock of one of the parties in this. Perhaps there's another explanation, BradB? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:37, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I found out by checking the block log, which you can find by going to TracyS' userpage and clicking "View full log". [[User:BradB|BradB]] 20:02, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent)Ah yes, so I see. Thanks for that. I also notice a rather unsavory comment in there from RobS regarding another sysop. This is starting to look very unsatisfactory. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 20:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

== User:Conservative ==

I take up an idea by Jcw to create a separate section to discuss User:Conservative. It is necessary to do so on this page, as his habit of blanking his own talk page (and keep it protected most of the time) makes a discussion meaningless over there.

Over the last days I tried to engage User:Conservative in a meaningful exchange of comments. I thought that this shouldn't be that difficult, as User:Conservative has often announced that he was willing to debate more or less skillful public orators, like R. Dawkins, PZ Myers, or some chap called Penn Jillette.

I wondered what made User:Conservative think that this is a good idea - his only motivation can be that even ''bad publicity is good publicity''. But there is not the slightest chance that any original good publicity comes from this: As the last days have shown that User:Conservative is lacking any skills for taking part in a debate.

A couple of times I asked him to show me to a talk page where he successfully debated with someone about [[Atheism]], [[Evolution]], etc. ([[Talk:Atheism and obesity#Via several weird redirected talk pages... |see here for example]].) There should be hundreds of such debates on talk pages, as User:Conservative generally claims that anyone criticizing his pet articles is a atheist, evolutionist, Darwinist, etc.

User:Conservative couldn't give any link. In fact, the main tactic of User:Conservative when confronted with awkward questions is a strategic withdrawal (sometimes after creating a fog of youtube-videos, baseless accusations,...) Examples: [[Talk:Evolution#We have decided that the article will not be changed in any major way.|(1)]], [[Talk:Evolution#The effects of the Question Evolution! Campaign will be devastating to evolutionary belief and atheism|(2)]] [[Talk:Evolution#Evolutionist science professors are cryin' to their mamas about the Question Evolution! Campaign|(3)]],[[Talk:Atheism#Dubious quote by John Calvert|(4)]], [[Talk:Atheism and obesity#Via several weird redirected talk pages...|(5)]] Obviously he hopes that his interlocutors get blocked, and that then he can delete (or archive) the whole episode into oblivion: out of sight, out of mind.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:28, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::You're only figuring this out now? He's been doing this since, like 2007 or so with the full approval of the administration. Why would you expect anything to change? [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 11:41, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar, I can see you are very frustrated. I would be frustrated too if I was an obscure atheist/evolutionists with no real evidence to offer for atheism/evolution. Lastly, I wouldn't call atheists PZ Myers or Penn Jillette skillful orators. For example, Jillette's speech is littered with obscenity. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:46, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

And again, no link to any talk-page where you showed your brilliant wit, where you outshone your opponents, where you were able to score actual points against your interlocutors, where you left the onlookers aghast, standing there in silence while admiring your abilities to lay out an well reasoned argument.

Why not? Because there is no place, not even here at Conservapedia, where anything remotely resembling such a discussion ever happened.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

== I suggest convening a panel on refining Conservapedia's blocking policy ==

I suggest convening a panel on refining Conservapedia's blocking policy.

Here are my suggestions:

1. I think every active Sysop/Admin should be on the panel; included in the mix should be a few senior editors with blocking rights who would be considered for sysop rights. Another Sysop agrees with me on this.

2. Given RobS's recent behavior (annoying/pestering sock of TracyS and about a dozen other socks I have been told, etc. etc.) and his recent loss of Admin rights, I suggest that he not be on the panel.

3. I suggest starting off with a clean slate and archiving this page's current content. The panel's deliberations could then commence here. Perhaps, a more civil tone would ensue. I also suggest that sockpuppet comments be reverted as far as commentary on the panel's deliberations plus brand new editors who are merely trolling.

4. I suggest that Andy weigh in on the final product.

Please let me know if you think such a panel is necessary and if you think the above suggestions are good suggestions.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:13, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:Seems like a good idea.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 13:30, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::Likewise. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:38, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::I am asking others to get involved in this section. For near term decision making, does archiving much of this page to start things off with a new slate sound good. Please vote below. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:41, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Well, I suggested it and got told it wouldn't work, but I still think it's a good idea, provided at least two things are included: 1) an appeal process that's open and transparent involving disinterested editors and sysops and 2) accountability on the part of the blocking editor. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:21, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:I am in, I hav e already laid out some guidelines elsewhere on Conservapedia. I am commited to to making CP fair and a happy place to edit. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:43, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::The Conservapedian Iduan has expressed some interest in helping refine Conservapedia's blocking policy. He is currently on a summer vacation. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:55, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall. Here are the people who signed up so far:

*[[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysops and Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

*[[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysop candidates with blocking rights]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:14, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

:::I sent an email to Iduan to find out when his vacation is over. I expect to receive a reply within 2-7 days. In the meantime, people who are going to be on the blocking policy refinement panel may want to look at these two pages: [[User:Iduan/Blocking Review Panel Ideas]] and [[User talk:Iduan/Blocking Review Panel Ideas]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:17, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::The panel is convening on 8/17/11: [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings]][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:59, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

== Please vote - archiving much of this page's content to start off with clean and more civil slate as far as blocking policy refinement panel forming - see above ==

Please vote - archiving much of this page's content to start off with clean and more civil slate as far as discussing blocking policy refinement panel forming (I think every active Sysop/Admin should be on the panel; included in the mix should be a few senior editors with blocking rights who would be considered for sysop rights). By the way, the panel deliberations could occur elsewhere. I thought the community portal though would be a good place and perhaps allow for this community portal to be used more constructively henceforth.

'''Yes votes:'''

Yes. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:44, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. In my opinion much of the discussion on this page consists of editors who've got hot under the collar and written intemperate things. A continuation of this sort of thing can only be bad for CP. A future discussion of related points must happen in a more organized and civil way. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:47, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 13:58, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. --[[User:AlejandroH|AlejandroH]] 16:12, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 01:32, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

'''No votes:'''

(EC) ''For near term decision making, does archiving much of this page to start things off with a new slate sound good. '' I assume that this was a question. Answer: No, it doesn't sound good. Please archive only those sections to which no user has contributed for more than one week. Thank you. [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:45, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. Attempting to bury the past doesn't deal with the valid questions already present. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 14:31, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. There have been some valid concerns raised, and "archiving" the page would be the equivalent of pretending those concerns were settled without actually answering them. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 15:31, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. But since when has anything here been decided by voting? The vote was something like 30-5 against RobS losing his sysop rights (can't be certain, since that page has since been unceremoniously burned.) Even if 75% of his supporters were parodists (unlikely) he still had majority support from the non-sysop editors. The decision here is going be made by the usual suspects, regardless of the outcome of this "vote". --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 15:37, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Archive it or not, it really doesn't matter. The conversations took place and they can't be taken back. Given some of the behavior I witnessed after RobS lost his admin rights, I'm very cynical about any changes occurring here, but I'm willing to try. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:30, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

=== A question for the ''ayes'' ===
Would you have voted for '''deleting''' the archives, too? [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 16:04, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Yes. While there might have been some good points in those discussions, the vast majority was name-calling by troublemakers, trolls and sockpuppets. Keeping it around gives a false impression of the site, which is exactly what the troublemakers, trolls and sockpuppets want. If any of the discussion in those archives was worthwhile, I'm sure it'll be brought up again in a more orderly fashion. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
== Why were the archives deleted? ==

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:50, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

:I second that question. "Starting off with a clean slate" should not mean burning all of the old discussions. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:00, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::A community is not a dishonest fool, his sockpuppet(s) and his atheist website vandal pals and their sockpuppets. No reason to provide an audience for such a spectacle. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:07, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Well, that is an answer, but not a very good one. Where was the vote on deleting the archives? Are you intending to single-handedly delete the current archive as well? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:15, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::I found out the non-syops blockers I needed to invite so I de-archived the material. I wanted the notice about the panel not to get buried too far down the page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

==On archiving==
By the way, I notice that Conservative has archived the recent discussions already. Since when does a 5-5 vote mean "yes, go ahead with it?" [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:01, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::It was 5-4. Sharon, was neither yes or no. It was "it does not matter". [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
:::That was up to interpretation. Anyway, how long did you have the vote up before closing the matter? By my count it's less than 12 hours. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:16, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

*the vote was up for less than 20 hours: that's an absurdly short time-
*it's even more absurd to vote on the minor matter (archiving, but preserving information) and act unilaterally on the big issue (destroying of information)
*To quote Sharon: ''The conversations took place and they can't be taken back.'' You are certainly trying, Conservative!
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:17, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Most of this page served as an attack page on several individuals, and that's going to stop. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:22, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::Karajou, there were also allegations that sysops have personally attacked editors. Those were "archived" without discussion of the issues. Do you have a comment on that? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Then they had better specify the reasons why these editors were attacked, and if these attacks were clearly for nothing, then I am open for sysop demotion; but if these alleged attacks were caused by the editors themselves through fighting, bad conduct, or the deliberate posting of false information, then they have no room to talk. For the record, the reasons why I will remove someone from the site are posted under the warning tag on my talk page. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:39, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

*Ah, love, peace and happiness at last. And quietness. The last may become a problem, as Andy Schlafly seems to enjoy record-breaking numbers of unique visitors, and these will be hard to come by when the contribution goes back to the level of the last quarter of 2010.
*And there are still attacks left on this page, like this comment about Rob Smith: ''(annoying/pestering sock of TracyS and about a dozen other socks I have been told, etc. etc.)''
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:56, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar: A few comments: 1) Western liberalism is running out of other people's money (Asian money, etc.) 2) Conservatism and austerity budgets are on the rise in the Western World so conservative websites should experience some growth 3) Conservapedia does plan on reviewing and improving its block policy 4) At an opportune time, perhaps in a few years, I may unveil a plan which I think Conservapedia may be more receptive to which I believe could increase its viewership. By the way, how many websites have you considerably added traffic to? My guess is none so your "expert" opinion has little weight. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

::::Did you post this in the wrong place? It doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 11:53, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:# ''Western liberalism is running out of other people's money (Asian money, etc.)'' And that is relevant because....?
:# ''Conservatism and austerity budgets are on the rise in the Western World so conservative websites should experience some growth'' And that is relevant because....?
:# ''Conservapedia does plan on reviewing and improving its block policy'' That may be a very promising development...
:# ''At an opportune time, perhaps in a few years, I may unveil a plan which I think Conservapedia may be more receptive too which I believe could increase its viewership.'' In the fast moving world of the internet, such intricate plans are of relatively little value.
:By the way: could you show me to a talk page where you successfully debated with someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? Thanks
:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:58, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar, who said my plan was intricate? :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::I found out the non-syops blockers I needed to invite to the panel so I de-archived the material. I wanted the notice about the panel not to get buried too far down the page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:48, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall ==

A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall. Here are the people who signed up so far:

*[[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysops and Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

*[[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

I am sending an email to [[User:Iduan]] to determine when he is returning from his vacation. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:16, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Just returned; first: sleep; then: back to business.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 17:01, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::I have blocking rights. May I join?--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 17:10, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I added you to list. I don't think there will be any objections to me doing so. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:58, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

==Response to Karajou==
I told Andy yesterday I would respond to these baseless charges today, but spent the better part of the last nine hours blocked after User:Conservative flip-flopped, reverted himself, and unblocked me (I'll accept your apology later, User:Conservative, for inconveniencing me). But to Mr. Karajou: you seem to be of the opinion that,
:'''A little leven leveneth the whole lump.'''
That would be true, if Conservapedia were a monolith, requiring ideological conformity. But it's not, and never has been. Let's not forget the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares,
:'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Tares#Narrative An enemy hath done this]. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest.''' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:29, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
Here is the evidence that I am aware of:

1. Both RobS and TracyS edited from the same IP address. After Karajou pointed this out, I personally confirmed this matter.

2. Both were somewhat obsessed with my talk page design in an annoying way despite the fact that Conservapedia says a user's talk page is his/her castle. At the time, I had a system for leaving messages to me. I have since closes my talk page for leaving messages due to RobS and his atheist pals use of pestering tactics.

3. Both were dishonest. For example, RobS claiming he referred to me as demonic at Conservapedia which he never did as he knows the charge was baseless plus he didn't have the guts to do this at Conservapedia, but instead chose to do this at an atheist gutter website that is filled with obscenity and gossip. TracyS claimed he/she was not trying to annoy me about my talk despite using language purposely meant to annoy.

4. Both were annoying and needlessly argumentative.

5. Karajou claims there were multiple sockpuppets of RobS, but I have not personally investigated this matter.

RobS is still an egotist and has learned nothing. It would be a big mistake at this time to give him back his Sysop/Admin rights. He would just foment a lot of useless drama and nonsense. Conservapedia doesn't need RobS the egotist to change its blocking policy and a panel of which he is not a part to refine its blocking policy is far better suited to the task. I invited people to take part in such a panel and some have accepted my invitation to take part in the panel.

I did block RobS earlier for a short spell due to him being disruptive to me posting a notice in this room that would be more constructive than much of the current content which I archived. However, with another Sysops's assistance I was able to send out invitations to the appropriate parties so the notice at the community portal was no longer needed so I unblocked RobS and de-archived the material. Given his past behavior, I see no reason to apologize for any inconvenience this caused RobS.

I will now let RobS give his empty sales pitch on how his desysoping was all a misunderstanding and a mistake on Aschlafly's part. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:28, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
:User:Conservative, I told Andy yesterday I would respond here, but was prevented by you and the whole day was wasted. Also, I see the whole page & its Archives have been vandalized, as well as other users private user space, so I hesitate in wasting anymore time here. I will however, respond with this:
:'''"pesterfesting"''': this is the term User:Conservative uses for what is commonly refereed to in the outside world as '''"[[Advocacy]]"'''. An advocate is a person who acts on behalf of others who are incapable, or have been prevented from acting on their own behalf. Two examples of advocates would be, (1) [[Andrew Schlafly]], noted attorney, and (2) [[Jesus Christ]], [[savior]] of the [[planet]]. Advocacy is very common in the world of wikis, but I can see where you would have difficultly with the idea. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:57, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RobS, in retrospect, I believe your "pesterfesting" was just a petty and narcissistic post TK power grab which tried to show others that you were the "big man on campus". Second, I am sorry to hear that you couldn't find other things to do besides edit Conservapedia and that your whole day was wasted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:07, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

== The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun ==

The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun and can be found [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings|HERE]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:16, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

== Android App? ==

Does anyone have the link to the android app? I am unable to find it for some strange reason. [[User:JacobSmith|JacobSmith]] 22:05, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
:I am an Android user. Nothing exists and was likely a person having fun with lies.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:14, 20 August 2011 (EDT)

== My Testimony ==

I was a liberal atheist. About two weeks ago, I was talking to a Conservative friend of mine and she pointed me to the site conservapedia.com. So I came here and read a few articles. Then read a few more. Then when I noticed registration was open, I signed up, but didn't contribute right away, but I kept reading. I read [[Christian apologetics]], [[Counterexamples to Evolution]], [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]], [[Counterexamples to Relativity]], [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]] and some wonderful essays too numerous to list. While reading, I felt...something. Something I haven't felt since I was a child. Yesterday, Sunday Morning, I did something I haven't done in nearly 30 years: I went to church. It was wonderful and I do believe I felt the Holy Spirit. I don't believe I deserve to call myself a Christian yet, but I'm looking forward to next Sunday. :-) Thank you all. --[[User:OliviaB|OliviaB]] 13:51, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

== Summer Paper Gone Bad ==

Summer is drawing to a close and school is beginning again. I have decided to write my essay on the origin of the moon, citing Conservapedia several times. When my teacher (this is a public school) gave me my paper back with the grade an all, he gave me a 62. In addition, he gave me a "good talking to" on not using Wikipedia. I tried to explain him that Conservapedia is different, he just wouldn't listen! He gave me the opportunity to do the paper again using different sources. I don't want to use different sources, because they are most often plagued with bias. My question is simple- how do we separate ourselves from Wikipedia to the general public, and how to we improve our reputation? --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 17:13, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
:Wikis are not normally considered good sources for research as they are generally open and can be edited by anyone. And any decent teacher (public school or not) probably won't accept an encyclopedia of any kind (hard copy or online) as a source for a research paper, as they normally want the student to actually do some research. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 19:06, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
::William, the good news is you were docked points for your sources and not for content. That implies that your teacher has an open mind. I'd suggest Answers in Genesis, A Storehouse of Knowledge, Creation Ministries International or look at some of Ray Comfort's books. Of course, these sources are all the work of man and are therefore always biased and flawed. For the truth, you'll want to turn to the Bible. --[[User:OliviaB|OliviaB]] 19:57, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

== An open apology to Conservative and Aschlafly ==

I was [[User:WalterS]] and made an inappropriate comment several months ago. Then two days ago I signed up again under the name JefferyA and tried to make some contributions to the Conservative dictionary. I was banned by [[User:Karajou]] for my actions as WalterS and told that I could come back if I apologized. I am therefore offering my apologies to [[User:Aschlafly]] and [[User:Conservative]]. I am sorry. It was wrong to vandalize your site. I know I don't deserve to stay, but if you can find it within you to allow me to, I would very much appreciate it. God be with you. --[[User:JefferyA|JefferyA]] 09:23, 6 September 2011 (EDT)
::Your sentiments are appreciated. With the being said, to the best of my knowledge Mr. Schlafly is the sole owner of the website. My articles tend to receive web traffic, but for the most part I create articles and I have blocked some vandals as well. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:09, 23 September 2011 (EDT)

== Banned user ==

Conservative recently banned SamCoulter for "putting garbage into article". However, the 'garbage' was a legitimate point backed up by a valid reference. Indeed, the same reference has been cited by Conservative on the main page. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 23:07, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
:This is a non-starter. Conservative is a senior admin with tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of quality edits. This is a meritocracy, David. [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 23:36, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
::Almost 5% of his "tens of thousands" of quality edits are minor edits. He also created 4 different articles all with the same information as a main article. From what it seemed, SamCoulter was just trying to bring more facts to the table. Three months seems too excessive for something that wasn't even explained as to "why it doesn't belong". [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 23:52, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
:::I don't agree with Conservative's articles on this topic. That said, I did not get the impression that SamCoulter meant what he posted as a serious contribution, but rather simply as an attempt to "prove a point". He basically [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:SamCoulter&curid=114914&diff=920263&oldid=920262 admitted the same himself, and called himself "juvenile"]. One should consider those facts before drawing any conclusions. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 00:14, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Nice job taking things out of context. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 00:32, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::I do not see how I am doing so. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 00:55, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's like people who quote verses from the Bible (specifically Leviticus). They quote what they want and not its entirety. He admitted what he did was juvenile, but he felt he had to do it that way to bring attention to a topic that Aschlafly appeared to be ignoring. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 01:04, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::SamCoulter behaved in a manner which, by his own admission, was juvenile, and as a result was blocked. That is the topic being addressed in this section. The issue of those articles, and what position Mr. Schlafly takes or ought to take with respect to them, is a separate discussion which does not belong in this section. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 01:17, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
Getting back to the point; Conservative banned SamCoulter specifically for "putting garbage into article". However, the 'garbage' in question was fully-referenced material, indeed it used the same reference as Conservative had on the main page, and SamCoulter was pretty much quoting what the referenced article stated. The number of edits an admin has made is irrelevant when it comes to determining whether a particular block was justified. A block must be judged according to the specific circumstances of the case, not the past activities of the admin doing the blocking. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 09:26, 24 September 2011 (EDT)

== re: User: LeonardS wanting to debate User: Conservative ==

Don't you have ANYTHING to say about my challenge? There's no need to run away; if you don't want to debate a simple "No thank you, I'd rather not" will be quite sufficient. I mean, it's not like I'm some sort of power-crazed vindictive bigot or anything. '''voiceoftruth2006''' --[[User:LeonardS|LeonardS]] 03:16, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Have you read [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] yet? There is hope and healing available. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:27, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:Interesting article. But it is not necessary to be obsessed with you, dear User:Conservative, to spot some inconsistencies between some of your statements and your actions: one can look into the logs of Conservapedia (your log-entries can be found [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=Conservative&page=&year=&month=-1 here]). E.g., you stated on 31 July 2011 (and repeatedly after this date):
:::'''''I am not going to be very active at Conservapedia for the near term. '''''
:On the other hand, you performed more than 5,200 logged actions after that date - as many as the next three busiest sysops (Aschlafly, Karajou and Jpatt) '''''together'''''. Generally your behavior doesn't change, whether you announce to have ''a full schedule in the following 90 days'' or not.

:You achieve this remarkable output by contributing to Conservapedia without much pause: over the last three days I couldn't find a period where you have been away from the computer form more than 6 1/2 h: you should try to avoid to have this lack of sleep to have an influence on the quality of your contributions.

:But this is not to uncommon for you: you can go for a nearly a whole day making pauses of half an hour, or for a couple of days without resting for six hours at a time. The only other sysop at Conservapedia who would do the same was TK. Now, it's clear why he showed this pattern - his illness didn't allow him to sleep for more than a precious two, three hours.

:Your fellow sysops failed to spot TK's problems. I'm afraid they keep up this habit of ignoring disturbing signs in other editors...

:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:10, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::Ronlar, I don't think it's very appropriate for you to be bringing up medical conditions in a public place. --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 09:16, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Sorry, I didn't want to bring up ''medical conditions'', I just made some - as I hope helpful - observations, without offering a diagnosis. BTW: is [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] a medical condition?
:::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:25, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Definitely not in the DSM --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 09:50, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::RonLar, setting aside whether your observations are correct about my sleep patterns and your apparent obsessiveness about my editing and sleep patterns, I will point out to you that some people don't need a lot of sleep and a cursory knowledge of history is all that is needed to know this. But I will make the allowance that perhaps you are an atheist that went to public schools and didn't learn much about history because you didn't apply yourself. With that being said, here is a list of famous people in history who didn't need a lot of sleep: [http://amolife.com/personality/great-people-sleep-less.html Famous people who didn't need a lot of sleep]. So even if you did obsessively log my time at Conservapedia (see: [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]]), you certainly have to take that into account. Plus, to my knowledge, there is no rule at Conservapedia indicating that people cannot share an account. Just out of curiosity why do you think there are some atheists who are very obsessed with myself and Conservapedia? I can assure you the obsession is not one that is mutually shared as the lives of obscure atheist vandal community members are not exactly riveting. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:02, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::''you maybe an atheist who want to public school and didn't learn much about history because you didn't apply yourself.'' I have had enough of your insults Conservative. Just cease it and be respectful of others as commanded: ''And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all ... (2 Timothy 2:24)''. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:15, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

User:Conservative, thanks for reacting to my comment. Let's have a look a it - I hope just answering to you won't get me blocked:
*''to my knowledge, there is no rule at Conservapedia indicating that people cannot share an account'' No, there isn't, and there have been examples of this practice: [[User:History]] and [[User:CPanel]] spring to mind. Of course, you could be many - and this would explain you turning down even an audio debate. But you look more honorable seen as a single person:
**in all your challenges you use the ''1st person '''singular''''': ''my articles'', ''my work'', etc. It would be deceitful to create this impression when asking Dawkins, Jillette (and others) to a debate, who must assume that you are a single person. And you won't be that deceptive, I hope?
**it would be lovely to read your ''manual of style'' which would be necessary to keep up your profile. This could be an excerpt:
::{|class="wikitable"
|style "background: lightgrey"|
#Don't use the preview button!
#phrase of the month: '''<s>with regards to</s> <s>obese</s> bestiality''' Use it often!
#Really, don't use the preview button!
…
|}
*''I will point out to you that some people don't need a lot of sleep'' An interesting list of famous people you are giving there. But keep in mind that ''sleeping'' is not the only thing which prevents you from editing Conservapedia. Even living today, those celebrities would have difficulties to keep up a 18-hours-a-day pattern of editing, as they would have ''jobs'' (''you certainly have to take that into account'') - Frankly, could Thomas Edison have invented anything if he would have been detracted by the Internet for most of his waking time?
*''So even if you did obsessively log my time at Conservapedia […] '' That's the fun of the WikiMedia software - I don't have to log your time, it's done automatically for me...
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 02:22, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

== Atheists from a vandal website want to debate User: Conservative ==

Adding cowardice characteristics:

I've just found out 2 major characteristics for cowardice:
*Trying to discredit opponents in view to avoid the confrontation
*Asking for unreasonable conditions and refusing the confrontation if those conditions are not fulfilled.
Would this be acceptable characteristics ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:57, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::One thing I do know is that obscure atheists who are members of vandal sites have to actually make a substantial donation to a Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability certified Christian relief organization and have a Bible believing pastor do the transaction for them before I would consider debating them since atheists have a penchant for deception (see: [[Atheism and deception]]). Oh by the way, I may challenge another well known atheist to a debate such as [[Penn Jillette]]. Given that there are 300 less atheists in the world every day and 80,000 more people everyday calling themselves Christian (see: [[Global Christianity]]) and that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will no doubt create ex-atheists and/or prevent people from becoming atheists in the first place[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I], perhaps it is better to wait so I get more favorable debate terms (I do realize that prominent atheists are often too chicken to debate and of course this trend may continue though (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). :) On the other hand, after the atheist population has been whittled down through conversion to theism, perhaps prominent atheists may be desperate to debate anyone in the future. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:37, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Is it a matter of them being too chicken to debate, or do they simply fail to see why they should make a "substantial donation" before debating an anonymous blogger? No offence, but if someone told ME that I'd have to hand over a few thousand dollars before he'd debate me, I'd think he was making excuses. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 14:58, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Also I don't really get the thing about deception. I mean, I see some guy challenged you to an audio debate. If you arrange the audio hookup then he doesn't appear, that's a victory and it proves your point. If he DOES appear then you get to beat him in the debate. The whole thing with the money does sort of look like a way to get out of challenges, if you look at it from their point of view. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

::::And what do fat Christians need to do in order to debate you about how CP treats people with weight issues? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 14:59, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:See my response to you at: [[Talk:Atheism and obesity]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:55, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Just to confirm - you refuse to discuss with me the way CP demeans obese people by linking them to everything a conservative Christian finds negative (atheism, homosexuality, feminism, etc.) and refuses to present anyone who is obese in a positive light. (Don't throw health issues into the mix: we both agree with the information on those.) --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:11, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
User:Conservative, you asked for '''17,000$''' (or even '''20,000$''') to be donated to a charity. For this money, one could get a celebrity like R. Dawkins to speak on this matter, in person. Getting this money for a written debate (though not given to you, but to a charity), you most certainly could enter the [[Guinness Book of Records]]! So, could you link to a debate here at a talk page at Conservapedia showing your debating skills? To prove that you a worth this kind of money? Just link us to a discussion where you think that you did exceptionally well! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 15:19, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::If obscure internet atheists who are part of a vandal website don't want to meet my terms, I have no problem with that. The atheism and evolution articles that I largely created (which they cannot find one factual error in) certainly do not want of readership so I am certainly not desperate. I would ask though that they do not whine about the matter like typical socially challenged internet atheist nerds. :) ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men. In short, quarrelsome nerds (see: [[Atheism and women]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Do you honestly think it's reasonable to expect people to pay $20,000 to debate - in writing, not even live - an anonymous blogger, then accuse them of cowardice for deciding that they'd rather have a new car? Sorry, I disagree. If you really wanted to debate atheists you wouldn't be doing all this nonsense with the money, and you'd jump at the chance when it was offered. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:53, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Thomas, would you like some cheese with that whine? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:56, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:You didn't answer my question. Do you think it's reasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 for a written debate with an anonymous blogger, then accuse them of cowardice for declining to do so? I don't think you actually want to debate atheists, or you'd have taken up the offer from that voiceoftruth guy. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:58, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Did I not challenge the atheist Penn Jillette to a debate? I may challenge other non-obscure atheist as well (see comments above). :) By the way, if you could resist the temptation to engage in further whining, I would appreciate it. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Penn Jillette is, as you have pointed out, not obscure. Do you expect him to reply to a challenge from an anonymous blogger? He's WAY above needing to worry about that. As far as I can tell here you're the one that's whining, because yet again you've ignored my question about exactly how reasonable it is to demand that people pay $20,000 for a written debate with an anonymous blogger, then call them cowards when they don't feel like throwing their money away. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:08, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::I am a Christian and I will debate you on the topic of Atheism and Obesity. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:09, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Have not other Christians challenged Penn Jillette to a debate? Has Penn Jillette ever debated a Bible believing Christian? Face it, he evolved into a chicken! (see also: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:13, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, I still think you are an atheist and an evolutionist. You certainly whine when I post material unflattering to atheism/atheist community and evolutionism enough. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:13, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:Stop changing the subject. We're not talking about Penn Jillette; we're talking about YOU. Why do you make such unreasonable demands then accuse people of cowardice for refusing to meet them? To demand $20,000 for a written debate with an obscure blogger is absurd, and it's also dishonest, because even when offered the money you still declined. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:16, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::Jesus Christ is my savior, Conservative. Whether you believe me or not is not a concern because ''He'' knows it true. I whine about poor scholarship, I don't care what anyone says about athesits but it must be grounded in ''fact''. Hence I will debate you on the topic of Atheism and Obesity right now, right here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:18, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::That sounds like a fair and reasonable debate offer to me. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 16:19, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Is all of this really necessary? Yes, it is rather unusual for Conservative to request compensation for engaging in a debate given his lack of celebrity status, but you should still take into account that he's asking for the money to be donated to charity, not paid directly to him. He won't actually gain anything from the offer. [[User:RyanK|RyanK]] 16:23, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::It's not a matter of where the money GOES; it's the fact that it has to be paid in the first place. User:Conservative is not a prominent figure; he's just an anonymous blogger. The idea that anyone would pay $20,000 to debate him is laughable. Well, ALMOST laughable - an offer has actually been made, which he refused after quickly changing his rules. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:34, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I think it's fairly obvious why he wishes to remain anonymous. This page alone shows how much harassment he would face from trolls were he to reveal his identity. The internet isn't a nice place, and people are always on the look out for ways to have fun at another's expense. I believe the term is 'lulz'. He has every right to protect himself from that. [[User:RyanK|RyanK]] 16:43, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Then he should expect others to do the same and not label them as 'chicken'.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::And he should also accept the fact that if he insists on remaining anonymous nobody's going to be stupid enough to hand over $20,000 to debate him. After all, what recourse do they then have if he fails to participate? If someone's paying that much for a debate it's perfectly reasonable for them to demand a proper contract laying down the conditions, and you can't do that if you don't know who you're meant to be debating. No, it's just a ploy to let him CLAIM he's willing to debate without ever actually having to do it. This was demonstrated when Jeeves at RW offered to pay the money, and User:Conservative still refused to debate him. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:51, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Conservative, I am willing to debate with you if you agree to give $20,000 to charity. If you are going to refuse my offer, you may be a chicken. I would as well agree that you do not reveal your identity. (No whining in this offer)--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Setting aside the matter of how desirable it is to be a celebrity, it does appear that some people are forgetting the press have quoted/cited my work (Chicago Tribune, St. Peterburg Times, LA Times, etc.). Of course, the Chicago Tribune and St. Petersburg Times quoted my work in a much more favorable light than more liberal press outlets being they are more conservative publications than many press outlets. In addition, gentlemen with doctorates in relevant fields have linked to my work. Of course, many of my atheist detractors are very aware of the press quoting my work, but being jealous, obscure, quarrelsome [[Essay: 10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd|atheist nerds]] they certainly are reluctant to admit this fact. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:54, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Can you link to these press outlets and people with doctorates citing your work? I am curious to read them. Also, what about my debate offer on Atheism and Obesity? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::First, I hope the 'atheist nerd' does not refer to me. Second, can you provide the links to these press articles ? Third, I think I am neither jealous, obscure nor quarrelsome... So why would you refuse to debate me ? Unfortunately, I am not wealthy enough to spare $20,000 for a debate but you will agree that lack of money is not a sin.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:03, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Irrelevant. We're not talking about press coverage of your work (do you have any links to support that, by the way?) but about the ludicrous conditions you attach to debates, while at the same time claiming that atheists are too scared to debate you. Well they aren't - you've had two offers from atheists in the last 48 hours, plus two more from fellow Christians, all of which you've avoided or refused - and it is dishonest of you to make this claim. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:05, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Max, Veritas48 was a kind and thoughtful Christian apologists at YouTube who was harassed in very inappropriate ways by atheists. [[JP Holding]] had an obsessive atheist call his wife at work. If you think I am going to allow some obscure, socially challenged atheist nerds (see: [[Atheism and women]]) to needlessly hassle people with doctorates who like my work and have cited it, that is not going to happen. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:12, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Harassment like continually calling them chickens, mocking their weight and farcical accusations bestiality? What about newspapers that have cited your work? How about my offer of a debate? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:24, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Again, that's not relevant unless you're saying that you're refusing to debate because you insist on anonymity. I don't see how an audio debate is going to affect that, so why did you refuse? And surely you realise that to ask people to pay $20,000 when they have no legal recourse if you don't attend the debate is completely unreasonable?--[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:17, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Thomas, bring some non-obscure atheists to debate me with reasonable offers to debate me via written debate or pony up the $20,000 to be given to a ECFA certified Christian relief charity that is requested of me to debate obscure atheists who are part of vandal websites. It's that simple. Deal with it and stop whining. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:22, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Conservative, people won't pay $20,000 to debate with an obscure christian nerd. No whining here.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yet AGAIN you have avoided the question: why do you impose such ludicrous conditions for a debate then accuse people of cowardice for not meeting them? If you genuinely want to debate atheists why don't you - as an obscure blogger - do so without demanding that they hand over $20,000 with no assurance other than your word that the debate will ever happen? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::Oy, Reminder, Keep the discussion civil.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 17:29, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I'm certainly willing to avoid the word "ludicrous" in future if other participants stop calling people cowards, quarrelsome nerds or socially challenged, and agree to stop questioning the faith of the Christian participants here. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:33, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Agreed to avoid calling others 'obscure nerds'--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:35, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::By the way, given that: 1) each day there are 300 less atheists in the world and 80,000 additional people who call themselves Christian each day (see: [[Global Christianity]]) 2) The [[Question evolution! campaign]] will cull the atheists population further.[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I] - I certainly may up the amount obscure atheists who are part of a vandal website must donate to a Christian relief organization in order for me to debate them. :) And of course, given the way that [[Ben Bernanke]] prints money, inflation is certainly a consideration as well. Also, I do realize it is often difficult to find non-obscure atheists who are willing to debate (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]), but I certainly would look at reasonable debate offers from such individuals. :) 17:43, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::I am offering you a reasonable debate on the topic of Atheism and Obesity. I am not a "quarrelsome atheist" or anything else. We can have a written debate here on conservapedia right now or at an agreed time. Why are you avoiding this offer yet calling everyone else a coward? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:49, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::For the same reason as he avoided the offers from Jeeves, Ace McWicked and voiceoftruth2006, I imagine. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:52, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I don't know who those people are...? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:54, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Jeeves and Ace McWicked are two members of RW who each offered to pay the required $20,000 for a debate with User:Conservative; even so, he declined. voiceoftruth2006 is a YouTube atheist who offered to debate him two days ago; he ignored the offer. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:57, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Gee, if I had a spare $20,000 I certainly wouldn't be offering it up for an internet debate! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:01, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::::It's probably quite safe to offer it to Ken; after all, if history is anything to go by he's not going to accept. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:03, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Excellent response, Conservative! Your intelligence level is obviously very, very high. [[User:AverageJoe|AverageJoe]] 17:47, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::How long do you intend to continue avoiding my question? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Oh I give up, it just doesn't make any sense...--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Conservative, do you think your comments on this page give a promising preview of your debating skills? Frankly, after reading your non-answers I have difficulties to imagine someone to pony up 2$ for the pleasure to have a written debate with you. But perhaps you can increase your market value by answering my question above:
::''So, could you link to a debate here at a talk page at Conservapedia showing your debating skills? To prove that you a worth this kind of money? Just link us to a discussion where you think that you did exceptionally well!''
Thanks, [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 17:52, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::Jeeves and Ace never showed that they had a trustworthy Christian to make the donation which certainly was a condition to debate. I did suggest giving the money to a Bible believing pastor of their choosing, but of course, that never happened. I understand that obscure atheists who are part of a vandal site don't like my debate conditions, but I think it is safe to say that this does not keep me up at nights. :) My back is not against the wall - it is the atheist population that is shrinking the world each day while the conservative Christian population appears to be exploding in numbers each day (see: [[Global Christianity]]). :) Keep squabbling amongst yourselves quarrelsome [[Essay: 10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd|atheist nerds]] (see: [[Essay: Atheism: A house divided and in global decline]] and [[Elevatorgate]] and [[Atheism and women]]), while God keeps expanding the Christian population! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:26, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::So Aschlafly isn't a trustworthy Christian? I mean, they DID offer to give the money to him. Anyway you still haven't answered my question, have you? Do you really think it's reasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 to debate an obscure blogger, with no legal assurance that the debate will actually take place even after they've paid, then call them cowards when they decline to do so? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:32, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Hi Conservative, my comments may have been lost on this page so please see [[Talk:Atheism_and_obesity#Reasonable_debate_offer|here]]. Thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:33, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

I'd just like to say that I think Conservative is not a coward and that he would debate if he could find a worthy opponent. Also, it is inappropriate to discuss this issue in public. --[[User:JohnCD|JohnCD]] 18:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:That's your opinion, of course, and you're entitled to it. However as Conservative frequently discusses the cowardice of atheists on this site he can hardly complain when his own willingness (or otherwise) to debate crops up, can he? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:49, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Thomas, what was stopping Jeeves and Ace from giving the donation to Bible believing pastor of their choosing to give to a Christian relief organization? Were they unable to find Bible believing pastors? Are there no Bible believing pastors in their country or in the world? I am sorry, but their bluff was called and shown to be the farce that it was. Please feel free to blather on today, but don't be surprised if I disregard your blather. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:57, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::What was stopping them giving the money to Andy Schlafly? I'll tell you what was stopping them giving it to a vicar; they didn't trust you and they wanted a properly witnessed and signed contract that legally committed you to doing the debate once the money had been paid. And you STILL haven't answered my question! You're just an obscure, anonymous blogger; don't you think it's utterly unreasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 to debate you, with no assurance that you'll even attend, then call them cowards for not doing so? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 19:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::User:Conservative, if you have the courage of your conviction then debating anyone about what you are sure is right then should be easy. Yet you avoid. Harding filling those who are watching this with confidence. I believe this to be an Encyclopedia where getting to the truth should be paramount. This can only be done by debate and a free exchange of ideas. Not be nit-picking the motives of those who wish to discuss things and come to a valid and provable conclusion[[User:Aortuso|Aortuso]] 03:04, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
I am going to be frank. The idea of debating obscure atheist members of a vandal site is repugnant to me and I don't see much value in it. It would be the equivalent of negotiating with terrorists which I think is generally a bad practice and to be avoided if possible. I would need to see a lot of good come out of it, hence the requirement that these people donate $20,000 to a Christian relief organization. I also see a lot of trends that don't bode well for atheism both in the Western World and Eastern World so I think the [[decline of atheism]] will continue (deficits causing budget cuts to liberal Western public universities, further decline of the liberal mainstream press audience, tough economic times causing individuals to turn back to God, [[Question evolution! campaign]], explosive growth of [[global Christianity]], etc. etc.). Of course, this further reduces my incentive to want to debate obscure atheists. Lastly, there are some personal things which I put off doing that I wish to attend to. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:57, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

:Strange. I thought that converting these atheist by using your superior debating skills would be a kind of reward in itself. How do you intend to help to cut the ''squeak'' of atheists in half if you are unwilling to engage them? Is this the reason that the [[Question Evolution!]] campaign is oriented to churches - which are the most unlikely places to find a atheist to convert him (or her)? And surprisingly, you are willing to speak with the ring-leaders, the ''top terrorists''! If you don't think yourself to be fit to move the heart - and brains - of the ''obscure atheists'', what do you think you can accomplish by speaking to the more famous ones? Oh wait: do you have a secret rhetorical device which can be used only once - and you try to optimize its impact? Sorry, those things work only in the fantasy of little boys plotting in their super-secret tree-houses...

:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:01, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
RonLar, I think the type of atheists who are part of vandal websites or the type of atheists who harassed Veritas48 at YouTube are the bottom of the barrel and are not the type of people who are good candidates for engagement. Jesus advised Christians not to cast pearls before swine. Second, I have always claimed that due to the weakness of atheism and the strength of the Christian position that it doesn't take exceptional debating skills to prevail and that is why a 15 year old boy can win debates with adult atheists as can be seen [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSo9hW2dOBo HERE]. Next, in most cases there is a reason why obscure internet atheists from vandal websites are obscure. Few people are interested in what they have to say. Lastly, tracts are designed to be evangelical and the [[Question evolution! campaign]] tracts are no different. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:47, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

=== In Short..===
You are saying that [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]], [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]], [[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]], [[User:SharonW|SharonW]], and [[User:ARamis|ARamis]] are vandals/atheists? [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 12:09, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:I am getting tired of these false accusations: Proverbs 3:30, ''Do not accuse a man for no reason, when he has done you no harm''. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:14, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
== Behaviour of Conservative (again) ==

Andy, Contrary to the wishes of every CP editor who has posted here, [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] has added some more disgusting articles about bestiality: [[Bestiality and Sweden]], [[Bestiality and Britain]] and (no joking) [[Denmark, Sweden, evolutionary belief and bestiality]]. What's more, he's protected these pages so no other editor can get rid of them. This whole stupid bestiality stunt by Conservative is making CP a complete and utter joke.

1. If I or any other editor blocks him for a short time to make him cool off, he'll simply revert the block. Will you please block him? Give him a week to get those animal images out of his head.

2. Will you please delete his disgusting pages on bestiality?

3. Will you please consider whether or not there's any point in a well-intentioned editor (like me) contributing to an encyclopedia which is just turning into a joke because of the deranged activities of an out-of-control editor who has a high level of administrator privilege? [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 17:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:First things first...
::1. You're going to successfully refute the bestiality edits posted. Either the individuals or countries cited have made claims pertaining to their support of bestiality, or they didn't.
::2. You're going to explain how yourself, a recent contributor to this website, can justify the removal of a senior administrator who has been here from the beginning; this explanation is contingent on you being able to satisfy condition number 1. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:37, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::1. These articles run contrary to the founding principles of this site in that they are utterly inappropriate for family viewing.
:::2. Personally I have no interest in "the removal" of User:Conservative, just some of his offensive articles.
:::Karajou, I urge you to move beyond a reflex defense of User:Conservative and to look at the harm being done to the reputation of this site. One of the reasons I have used Conservapedia as a reference instead of Wikipedia is that it doesn't contain references to extreme deviance. These latest articles violate that principle. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 17:44, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::And what harm is that? What harm is actually being done to this website? What exactly is the harm that this website is engaging in by telling the public about a disgusting sexual practice and those who promote it? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:50, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I can help with number one in that [[Bestiality and Britain]] doesn't have any mention of Britian and actually pertains to a British study of Sweden and has nothing to do with Britain - hence should be deleted. Also, [[Atheism and bestiality]] again says nothing of atheists - the only connection is that Peter Singer himself is an atheist. I actually can't check any deeper as I am on a shared network and don't want these articles on the logs. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:45, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

::::1a. Well, I have no direct information about the claims of bestiality of course, not least because no hard, verifiable data is given in any of the articles Conservative cites.
::::1b. Bestiality is illegal in Britain, unlike in many US states - including some of the most conservative states such as Alabama. Would you like me to add an article about "The USA, conservatives and bestiality" just because some weirdo in Alabama might be doing it with a dog? That makes as much sense as Conservative's stupid articles about atheists and bestiality.
::::2. Because this senior administrator is completely out of control, making a total mockery of the website. Think about it for a microsecond - please... He clearly needs a cooling-off period to stop thinking about such weird stuff, let alone putting on a website which is supposed to be family-friendly. Some of the other senior administrators need to get a grip. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 17:52, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::You have ''"no direct information about the claims of bestiality"'', by admission, so all of this is just another attack on Conservative by whiners who cannot or will not offer anything beyong whines and rants, and this has been going on in one form or another by select individuals for years. My message is simple: it stops NOW. You're going to respect him, or you're going to leave. Period. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:03, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::I am not going to mention Conservative but, Karajou, I would like to point out my comment above - particularly as you said ''the individuals or countries cited have made claims pertaining to their support of bestiality, or they didn't.'' The Britain article says nothing about the practice in Britain. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:12, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::If Conservative - or any other user - is wrong, then you ''politely'' say so, provide evidence to back up your claims, and then drop the subject. That is how it works here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:26, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::That is what I have already done I thought? The [[Bestiality and Britain]] article does not mention bestiality practices in Britain hence needs to be renamed or removed. thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:29, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Karajou, the guiding principles of the site take precedence over everything else here, except the Word of our Lord. I quote from the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]:
::::::::::''"Everything you post must be true and verifiable"'' - people have already pointed out that "Conservative"'s study is neither of these.
::::::::::''"Any content you create ... must be family-friendly"'' - these articles '''clearly''' are not family-friendly.
:::::::::In other words, these new articles by "Conservative" are in violation of two of the founding principles of this site. By your own standards, they must be deleted. I'm afraid that the onus is upon '''you''' to explain why these articles remain, in violation of the standards defined by the site's owner. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 18:50, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
I think that it is very disrespectful to keep bringing this debate to Andy talk page. It is obvious that he does not want to get involved in this, and you should respect his decision. --[[User:AlejandroH|AlejandroH]] 18:55, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:Max, Is the Bible family friendly? What are your thoughts about these verses of the Bible: Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21 ? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:45, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::Well, that is a slightly facetious argument. You can't compare the Bible, and the laws of God, to Conservapedia firstly and secondly Conservapedia, unlike the Bible, has an explicit Family Friendly rule. And please address the fact that [[Bestiality and Britain]] has no mention of Bestiality and Britain. Just to be clear - my quarrel isn't with you ''personally'' but at the poor scholarship. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:53, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Khalid, atheism is madness and immorality is commonly associated with atheism. When people read about topics such atheism, it is not surprising to many people to read about odd/bizarre/weird things and people committing sinful acts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:58, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::The history of liberal opposition to my articles [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS8rpt1y6lk&feature=related reminds me of someone.] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:12, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Just because someone has problems with your articles doesn't make them a liberal. [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 21:14, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

''And what harm is that? What harm is actually being done to this website? What exactly is the harm that this website is engaging in by telling the public about a disgusting sexual practice and those who promote it?'' I generally see to possible disadvantages:
*the visibility of Conservapedia may suffer: ''bestiality'' isn't a word suffered well by filters, especially not by those which parents use to protect their children from the filth on the net.
*''you are fat'' may be seen as a crude bit of humor, ''you are abusing animals'' less so. I assume that's the reason for which Andy deleted a section on his talk page - remember, he's a lawyer!
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:24, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

== Andy, are you reading your Talk page? ==

If so, please read the section above (Behaviour of Conservative) and please take a decision on which way you want CP to go: family-friendly encyclopedia or weirdo blog. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 18:08, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:That's very black and white. When making an argument try to avoid those.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Khalid, atheism is madness and immorality is commonly associated with atheism. When people read about topics such atheism, it is not surprising to many people to read about odd/bizarre/weird things and people committing sinful acts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:58, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Can this section be removed? It is a waste of space since I'm sure Mr. Schlafly reads his own talk page. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 21:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

Why don't we move this entire discussion to the Community Portal? I am sure Mr. Schlafly doesn't appreciate all the bickering on his talk page.--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 21:23, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

== The atheism blues ==

Announcing: [[Essay: The atheism blues|The atheism blues]]. Let the whining, kvetching and crying the blues begin in earnest! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:01, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:I am still waiting for you to accept my Atheism and Obesity debate challenge and address the fact that [[Bestiality and Britain]] contains information on Bestiality and Britain. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:06, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
::The start of this section sounds like trolling. I've seen my fair share of them in the [[User:JonG/Tribunal|Tribunal]] and on deviantART.
::'''*hammers in a sign exclaiming, "Do not feed the trolls!"*''' [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 00:21, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
== Conservapedia Giving Itself a Bad Reputation ==

Andy:

I'm sure you are aware of the enormous uproar that has been going on about the behavior of administrator "Conservative", and, in particular, his creation and promotion of utterly horrid pages. I'm sure you are also aware of the uproar relating to your unwillingness to even recognize, much less do something about, this problem. People assume that your silence may be, in part, due to the web traffic that Conservative brings, and that you think this is a constructive result.

So I earnestly ask you to consider this: I Googled articles referring to the 2012 Presidential Election. I know that this is an article that you have made many contributions to, and seem to care deeply about. But I couldn't see any hits in the first 300 items. (That's as far as I checked.) Yet, when I search for atheism+bestiality, its talk page comes up as hit #7. So this is being widely discussed across the internet. Is this the outcome you want? Do you not care about the visibility of the 2012 Presidential election article?

(Edited from a "safe" IP at a college.) [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:19, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
::No answer... This is getting frustrating--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:48, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::Standard operating procedure. Aschlafly rarely comments on broad criticisms of the project or of longtime users. When SamHB has racked off as many edits and page hits as has Conservative, then Aschlafly might find his critiques worthy of attention.--[[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 17:02, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
If memory serves, the Bible mentions and condemns this practice 4 separate times and it does so in a non-salacious manner. For thousands of years the Bible has been taught to children with very beneficial effects. Conservapedia also condemns this practice and points out it being mentioned inapropriately by members of the immoral worldviews of atheism/evolutionism which denies the existence of God despite the [[Christian apologetics|abundant evidence for God's existence]] and Conservapedia's article does so in a non-salacious manner. The atheistic worldview has a history of mass murder (see: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Abortion and atheism]] ). Question: Did Moses and God make a mistake by mentioning this practice in the Bible 4 separate times? If so, why? Also, the real issue is that the articles are further pointing out the immorality within atheism/evolutionism and Wikipedia and you don't like it, isn't it? If not, why not? Well, tough. There is no need to cater to liberal censorship in this matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:48, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:So Conservapedia is better served by being known for having poorly written articles on revolting habits because they are mentioned in the Bible 4 times as opposed to being known for having scholarly articles on far weightier and relevant topics? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:02, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
We live in a new era - the [http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2011/09/question-evolution-campaign-powerpoint.html Atheism and Evolutionism Whupping Era.] :) Get used to it as the whuppings are going to continue and with greater frequency and intensity. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:13, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::Just as I have come to expect - ignore valid points, make veiled insult (insinuating I am an "evolutionist"), make irrelevant remark. I honestly don't know how you managed to stay here when anyone would have been banned long ago. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:16, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Max, you should know that you cannot expect rational answers from Conservative.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 18:17, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Yes but I will always give him a chance to respond: ''Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.'' [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:22, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::You do realise that now articles are being made linking revolting practices to individual countries right? Are you aware of just how many articles deal with this topic and how many long-standing serious articles like [[liberal]] and [[wikipedia]] are carrying the same terminology? Please end this farcical sideshow, Andy. Isn't conservapedia ''your'' site? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:26, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::If you want to be technical, that depends on how much you consider this site to be a pure wiki. (Note, pure wiki is my term for a wiki that follows the basic principle of not having a single leader, it might have people given more leadership than others, but in general rule of the land is pretty much all editors; sysop, beuro, new old are on equal footing, vaguely what wikipedia would like to be)--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 00:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::: Hello again Max. I think, whilst I agree with you and the others here, that we cannot change the behavior of User:Conservative. We should just attempt to make this wiki as best we can and choose to ignore the things we disagree with. Even though I find, and obviously a lot of you find, them hardly in the Christian spirit.[[User:Aortuso|Aortuso]] 01:08, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::"Tertullian scornfully mocked those who advocate a Stoic or a Platonic or an Aristotelian Christianity" from The early church By Henry Chadwick. The early Christians were not shrinking violets. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:28, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Tertullian was also the guy who didn't think Christians should go to the circus or the theater. My guess he wouldn't be a fan of TV either. He also thought Christians shouldn't look upon things that they were forbidden to practice. Wonder how he'd feel about sitting in front of the computer writing about bestiality all day? BTW- Whose turn was it to turn off night editing? ;-) --[[User:SteveK|SteveK]] 02:20, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

Can I just say that Conservative's articles and additions comparing the UK to animal-sodomizing hellholes is both offensive and completely unmerited? Articles like [[Bestiality and Britain]] are completely absurd considering the only "evidence" of bestiality occurring is a single blurb from a Swedish newspaper that may or may not be talking about Great Britain (it doesn't say where the veternarians in question are located). I understand he has a strong viewpoint but good grief, you need more evidence than THAT. [[User:GiveMeLiberty|GiveMeLiberty]] 11:27, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Britain has one of the highest dog ownership rates in the world.[http://dogitchyskinsolutions.com/pet-ownership-statistics-%E2%80%93-very-high-numbers] Why would a British study focus on dog owners say in France? You are not using any common sense which is par for the course given that you are probably an atheist. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:40, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
::::*sigh* I was worried that you were serious there for a second. B/c obviously British studies only focus on British and Americans only study Americans. No one EVER does studies on other countries or on multiple countries. But no, that last comment revealed that you are, indeed, not serious. [[User:GiveMeLiberty|GiveMeLiberty]] 13:17, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
::::I'm not sure if you should assume he's joking. At least on Conservapedia, Atheism is often connected to a lack of common sense in the thought processes of the community. Unless you indeed are an atheist, you should probably assert your theism and common sense. I'm not trying to be mean to you; your logic is valid and I fully agree with you. I'm just trying to keep you safe. --[[User:SpenserL|SpenserL]] 16:14, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::I personally do not believe that a mere human could comprehend God. Therefore, I am not a Christian, nor am I a member of any organized religion. In His almighty splendor, He is just too much for us to comprehend. [[User:GiveMeLiberty|GiveMeLiberty]] 22:20, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

As a compromise, perhaps Conservative should label all his bestiality articles as Essays, so he can protect them to his heart's content and no-one will be misled into thinking that they represent anything other than Conservative's personal point of view. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 17:32, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Conservapedia saw a significant increase in traffic since the debut of the articles according to Alexa. No doubt the traffic was due to conservatives who love seeing atheism skewered once again at Conservapedia. :) [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/conservapedia.com] The atheists have always maintained that the atheistic Sweden was soooooooo above all other nations, but thanks to the help of Conservapedia now everyone will be able to better see they are a total disgrace as a nation! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:12, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Sorry sadiq, but I think the rise in traffic is much more likely to be due to atheists having a laugh. Google for <conservapedia bestiality -conservapedia.com> to see what the on-line world thinks of your efforts - sorry to disappoint you. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 19:05, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
[[File:Flag of Sweden.png|thumbnail|300px|right|Disgraced!!!! ]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:36, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:Uh? [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 20:20, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
::::I cited a story on LifeSiteNews related to this practice being apparently on the rise in Sweden.[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/1950/50/5050406] They did a whole story on it. Do you feel LifeSiteNews is a family friendly website? Do you think any LifeSiteNews stories should be banned at Conservapedia? If so, why? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:38, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

Soccer

2011-10-02T22:35:33Z

SeanS: Undo revision 923888 by RobertE (talk) no wikipedia

[[Image:2010 World Cup.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Pictured is [[Miroslav Klose]], a star Polish-born player competing for the highly ranked German team, during the 2010 World Cup]]
'''Soccer''' is a popular sport played with a round ball propelled mainly by kicks from a player's foot.
In soccer, players are not allowed to intentionally touch the ball with their hands or arms while it is in play, with the exception of goalkeepers in a restricted area. The goal of the game is to kick the ball into the opposing team's goal; each goal gives that team a point and the team with the most points at the end of the 90 minute game is the winner.
Outside the USA, it is generally called "football" (Spanish: ''fútbol'').

==Origins==

The word ''soccer'' derived in England as slang for "Association Football", <ref>[http://london.usembassy.gov/rss/transcripts/worldcup2006a.html] ''US Embassy, London'' </ref>. Football games have been popular in [[England]] since the [[Middle Ages]], but the modern game of soccer derives from formalizations of the rules during the mid nineteenth century. The [[Football Association]] (FA) was founded in 1863 and continues to be the game's governing body within the [[UK]]. "Association Football" (later shortened to soccer) meant the version of football approved by the Football Association's rules. The rules were published at [[Cambridge University]] in 1847, as many private schools were playing each other with different rules.

==Rules of the Game==
[[Image:Soccer pitch.gif|right|thumb|300px|left|Dimensions of a soccer pitch]]
The game is played between two teams of 11 players (10 out-field players and one goalkeeper each). In official play, there are two 45 [[minute]] halves separated by a break known as half-time which according to the rules of the game must last less than 20 minutes. Unlike most sports, the clock does not always stop when the ball is not in play. When the ball is knocked out of bounds or a penalty is committed, the clock runs continuously. If a player is injured then the [[referee]] makes up that lost time by adding minutes onto the end of the half. This is known as [[stoppage]] or injury time. If both scores are even at the end of regulation time, the game is usually declared a draw. However, in knockout cup games, there is often an additional period of play consisting of two 15-minute halves. In some competitions, the first goal in this period (golden goal) wins the game. If the scores are still level, the result is decided with a [[penalty shootout]]. The set of rules used in soccer are called the [[Laws of the Game]].

The game is played on a [[grass]] (or artificial grass) pitch with dimensions 90-120 m (100-130 yards) in length and 45-90 m (50-100 yards) in width.
<ref>[http://www.fifa.com/documents/fifa/laws/LOTG2006_e.pdf FIFA Laws of the Game 2006] ''Official FIFA website''</ref>
A goal is scored when the ball is propelled into the opposition net. The side scoring the most goals is the winner. Infringements include playing the ball with any part of the body other than the feet or head; pushing or blocking an opposing player and stepping outside the playing area while the ball is in play.

Accuracy in kicking is very important to make sure that one can kick the ball around opponents, manage it in tight spaces, and make long passes to other players in better positions. Expert players have trained to kick from a variety of angles, both forward and back and to the side, and also to use their chests and heads to maneuver a high-flying ball.

==Soccer Around the World==
[[Image:800px-Soccer goalkeeper.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Goalkeeper leaping to make a save]]
It is the most popular [[team sport]] in the world, described by the legendary Brazilian player, [[Pele]], as "The Beautiful Game". Its governing body is [[FIFA]] (Fédération Internationale de Football Association). In most countries it is the most popular sport or at least among the most popular (the [[United States]] being a notable exception). Though it is often not a high-scoring game, its popularity comes from the often dramatic saves from goalkeepers and incredible shots from skilled players in attempts to score a goal. In the United States soccer was associated with communism during the Thirties, as several communist organizations used soccer in an attempt to recruit recent European immigrants to their cause.

Every four years there is an international competition known as the [[World Cup]], where countries send their best players to compete for the title of best national soccer team. Every four years in Europe there is the European Championship in June and July when the leagues finish which is a 16 team competition for members of UEFA, the European governing body. Each other continent also has a competition, such as the African Nations Cup, which is every two years in January.

Many soccer fans are extremely passionate about their favorite teams, traveling to other countries to support them. Several countries have had problems controlling over-excited fans, with the crowd sometimes spilling onto the pitch, fighting with themselves, disliked referees and even players. [[England]] once had a poor reputation from its soccer [[hooligan]]s who got into drunken fistfights with fans of other teams. This situation has largely changed, with much better behavior at English football matches and considerably increased violence in several other countries, especially [[Italy]].

In most European countries each large town will have at least one football team who play in leagues, which last August to May in most of Europe but March to October in others. Unlike most American sports, the top teams in each league go up a league to be replaced by the last teams in the league above. The top teams in the top division of each European country enter the UEFA Champions League, a league and knockout competition played on Tuesdays and Wednesdays around the season.

==Great Players==

* [[Ferenc Puskas]], a forward for [[Real Madrid]] and [[Hungary]] in the 1950s, introduced 'total football' and destroyed the old-fashioned English team of the time.
* [[Lev Yashin]] of the USSR in the 1960s is reputed to be the best-ever goalkeeper.
* [[Pele]], [[Brazil]]ian player active from 1956-1974, often considered to be the greatest soccer player to ever kick the ball.
* [[Alfredo di Stéfano]], [[Argentinia]]n midfielder who played for [[Real Madrid]]. considered by Maradona to be the greatest.
* [[Bobby Moore]], captain of England in the 1966 World Cup Finals and one of the finest ever center halves.
* [[George Best]], of [[Manchester United]] and [[Northern Ireland]] in the 1960s, was possibly the best player never to have played in the World Cup Finals.
* [[Franz Beckenbauer]] played for [[West Germany]] in the 1960s and 70s. Defenders rarely gain the limelight in football but Beckenbauer's performances against the great teams of England in 1970 and Holland in 1974 were exceptional.
* [[Johann Cruyff]], captain of Holland in 1974 and 1978: why his Dutch team's brand of Total Football never won them the World Cup is an enduring mystery.
* [[Diego Maradona]], [[Argentinia]]n midfielder of the 1980s, often mentioned alongside Pele as one of the greatest.
* [[Zinedine Zidane]], [[French]] player, retired shortly after the World Cup final match between France and [[Italy]] in 2006.
* [[Cristiano Ronaldo]], a [[Portuguese]] contemporary player for [[Real Madrid]].
* [[Lionel Messi]], [[Argentina]]n forward, currently plays for [[Barcelona]].

==A note on terminology==

{{football meaning}} In many other languages, a [[phonics|phonetic]] equivalent to the English word "football," such as the Portuguese word "futbol" is used to denote the sport.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Sports]]
[[Category:Football soccer]]
[[Category:Soccer]]

Faithless

2011-10-01T20:02:51Z

SeanS: /* Political Protest of Religion */

Being '''faithless''' describes a state where a person lacks the discipline and direction to follow [[Christ]] fully. The range of '''faithlessness''' may vary in degree from absolute [[atheism]] to simply needing guidance.

The difference between '''a faithless person''' and an [[atheist]] is that a faithless person has no strong belief in [[God]] whereas an atheist has no belief at all in [[God]]. An atheist is faithless, but a faithless person is not necessarily atheist.

Many people struggle with their [[Faith]] in God, due to the complexities of the [[universe]] and our human incapability to understand it. The way for '''a faithless person''' to rebuild their connection with [[God]] is to [[repent]] for their [[sin]] of not trusting him and to attend [[Mass]] to show they are willing to trust in God.

''Lean not on your own understanding, but trust in the LORD with all your heart.''
-Proverbs 3:5

==Examples of Faithless People==

Here is a partial (but not exhaustive) list of some faithless groups of people:

*[[Hollywood]]
*[[Liberals]]
*Several college professors
*The [[Obama]] administration
*[[Atheists]]
*[[Homosexuals]]
*Non-conservative [[MSM|media]]
*[[Evolutionists]]
*[[Global Warming]] "scientists"
*Psychopaths

==Signs of Faithlessness==

There are many signs to identify if a person is '''faithless''' or may not have a strong [[Faith]] in God. A person may outright declare their disbelief in [[God]] (in which case, one should try to direct the person back into [[Christ]]'s arms); however, sometimes less subtle clues can indicate a person's shaky standing with their relation to God. Be on the lookout for some of the following signs.

===Disregard for Sin===
A person who disregards [[sin]] in entirety and leads a hedonistic lifestyle may be at risk of being faithless. For example, a [[homosexual]] does not care that his actions are sinful perhaps because he is not confident in the existence of [[God]]. Another such example is that people who use drugs disregard that "the body is a temple". Be on the lookout for violence, sex, and other Sin; as they may indicate one has lost their direction toward [[Jesus Christ]].

===Need for Proof of God===
Many times one will try to reinforce their Faith by stating that there is undeniable proof of God. In reality, one is possibly unsure about one's [[Faith]] and is trying to make "logical" reasons to why their Faith is right. This is a dangerous part of '''faithlessness''' because the person is in denial about their disbelief in God. They will try to connect science to religion and find some trivial detail that somehow "proves" the existence of [[God]]. What they fail to realize is that one does not need proof for God: if one had Faith, they could believe in [[God]] despite all of the alleged "scientific" evidence to suggest otherwise.

===Political Protest of Religion===
Supporting doctrines like [[Separation of State and Church]] might be a cry for help. People who engage in political protest against organized religion may simply be starting to lose their [[Faith]] in God. Some claim they are [[religious]] yet do not wish to push their religion onto others; however, deep down they are trying to create a feeling that it is "okay" to question their [[Faith]].

At the same time, you can still have faith and want separation of church and state as a National church has historically led to more liberal and faithless populations (See Europe)

[http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/d30-6/inauguration-protest-athiests.jpg This man] is painfully '''faithless''' and perhaps incapable of repenting his Sins.

===Not Attending Mass===
Someone who does not go to [[Church]] regularly may be losing their relationship with God. Missing [[Mass]] is one of the first signs of '''faithlessness'''. Someone who does not attend Mass is not respecting God, perhaps because they [[atheism|refuse to believe]] in His existence. Usually, not attending Mass is a minor offense, but it may lead to greater grievances.

==Questioning One's Faith==
Questioning one's [[Faith]] is a normal aspect of any [[Christian]]'s path to understanding. How the follower deals with those natural questions and what results thereof determines whether not it aids to strengthening their [[Faith]] or strengthening their '''faithlessness'''.
[[Category:Religion]]

Faithless

2011-10-01T19:59:38Z

SeanS: /* Political Protest of Religion */ protesting a unified church and state setuop doesnt make you a liberal, just look at europe and the effects national churches have had

Being '''faithless''' describes a state where a person lacks the discipline and direction to follow [[Christ]] fully. The range of '''faithlessness''' may vary in degree from absolute [[atheism]] to simply needing guidance.

The difference between '''a faithless person''' and an [[atheist]] is that a faithless person has no strong belief in [[God]] whereas an atheist has no belief at all in [[God]]. An atheist is faithless, but a faithless person is not necessarily atheist.

Many people struggle with their [[Faith]] in God, due to the complexities of the [[universe]] and our human incapability to understand it. The way for '''a faithless person''' to rebuild their connection with [[God]] is to [[repent]] for their [[sin]] of not trusting him and to attend [[Mass]] to show they are willing to trust in God.

''Lean not on your own understanding, but trust in the LORD with all your heart.''
-Proverbs 3:5

==Examples of Faithless People==

Here is a partial (but not exhaustive) list of some faithless groups of people:

*[[Hollywood]]
*[[Liberals]]
*Several college professors
*The [[Obama]] administration
*[[Atheists]]
*[[Homosexuals]]
*Non-conservative [[MSM|media]]
*[[Evolutionists]]
*[[Global Warming]] "scientists"
*Psychopaths

==Signs of Faithlessness==

There are many signs to identify if a person is '''faithless''' or may not have a strong [[Faith]] in God. A person may outright declare their disbelief in [[God]] (in which case, one should try to direct the person back into [[Christ]]'s arms); however, sometimes less subtle clues can indicate a person's shaky standing with their relation to God. Be on the lookout for some of the following signs.

===Disregard for Sin===
A person who disregards [[sin]] in entirety and leads a hedonistic lifestyle may be at risk of being faithless. For example, a [[homosexual]] does not care that his actions are sinful perhaps because he is not confident in the existence of [[God]]. Another such example is that people who use drugs disregard that "the body is a temple". Be on the lookout for violence, sex, and other Sin; as they may indicate one has lost their direction toward [[Jesus Christ]].

===Need for Proof of God===
Many times one will try to reinforce their Faith by stating that there is undeniable proof of God. In reality, one is possibly unsure about one's [[Faith]] and is trying to make "logical" reasons to why their Faith is right. This is a dangerous part of '''faithlessness''' because the person is in denial about their disbelief in God. They will try to connect science to religion and find some trivial detail that somehow "proves" the existence of [[God]]. What they fail to realize is that one does not need proof for God: if one had Faith, they could believe in [[God]] despite all of the alleged "scientific" evidence to suggest otherwise.

===Political Protest of Religion===
Supporting doctrines like [[Separation of State and Church]] might be a cry for help. People who engage in political protest against organized religion may simply be starting to lose their [[Faith]] in God. Some claim they are [[religious]] yet do not wish to push their religion onto others; however, deep down they are trying to create a feeling that it is "okay" to question their [[Faith]]. At the same time, you can still have faith and want separation of church and state as a National church has historically led to more liberal and faithless populations (See Europe)

[http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/d30-6/inauguration-protest-athiests.jpg This man] is painfully '''faithless''' and perhaps incapable of repenting his Sins.

===Not Attending Mass===
Someone who does not go to [[Church]] regularly may be losing their relationship with God. Missing [[Mass]] is one of the first signs of '''faithlessness'''. Someone who does not attend Mass is not respecting God, perhaps because they [[atheism|refuse to believe]] in His existence. Usually, not attending Mass is a minor offense, but it may lead to greater grievances.

==Questioning One's Faith==
Questioning one's [[Faith]] is a normal aspect of any [[Christian]]'s path to understanding. How the follower deals with those natural questions and what results thereof determines whether not it aids to strengthening their [[Faith]] or strengthening their '''faithlessness'''.
[[Category:Religion]]

User:SeanS

2011-10-01T19:55:23Z

SeanS: small italicized text in all undercase!!!!!!11!!1!

Fear my userbox filled userpage >:D

*{{User Vandalized|3}}*

<big>'''GIANT BOLDED TEXT IN ALL CAPS!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!'''</big>

''small italicized text in all undercase!!11!!1!



<big>'''I'm in my Freshman year of college so, I won't be available in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the Day''</big>--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! '''AA'''
! '''CC'''
|-
| '''AA'''
| ''AA''
| ''AC''
|-
| '''CC'''
| ''AC''
| ''CC''
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! Red
! Blue
! Yellow
|-
| '''Red'''
| Red
| Purple
| Orange
|-
| '''Blue'''
| Purple
| Blue
| Green
|-
| '''Yellow'''
| Orange
| Green
| Yellow
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Things
! Magic
! Science
! Religion
|-
| '''Storms'''
| Spells cast by Magi
| Water Vapor, electrical discharge and whatnot,
| God, possibly disfavor
|-
| '''Nat. Disaster'''
| Spells cast by a Magi
| Various causes
| God
|-
| '''Human Disaster'''
| Black magic causing chaos and problems.
| Various, usually Humans are Evil or stupid
| God, Demon, Human Will
|}

--
=About me=

*I love Astronomy, History, Video games, geography, geology, ect

I'm versed in the scientific views of the origins and of history (I don't believe it, but i find sciences story about how history went to be VERY entertaining and interesting)

I plan to teach history of a European variety.

I love video games, especially Japanese style rpg's.

I am a biblical, conservative non denominational christian

I'm Registered as a Non-Partisan Voter

==Favorite bible Quotes==

'''Revelation 21:2-4''' - ''2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ”Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”''

'''Ezekiel 18:23''' - ''”Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?”''

=userboxes=

{{User Christian}}
{{User straightforwardbiblereading}}
{{User windows}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User Youngearth}}
{{User NoEvo}}
{{User Donuthole}}
{{User American}}
{{User Not Obama}}
{{User Protestant}}
{{User Constitution}}
{{User patriot questions authority}}
{{User no death penalty}}
{{User anti-pot}}
{{User Soccer1}}
{{User Galactic Empire}}
{{User pubschool}}
{{User sysopother}}
{{User faveband|My Chemical Romance}}
{{User guncontrol}}
{{User antigun}}
{{User free speech}}
{{User nowar}}
{{User Interest}}

Talk:Essay: The atheism blues

2011-09-30T13:31:36Z

SeanS:

Ahem* It's atheism with an "i."--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 22:15, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:Why not write a song about the non-atheists who have valid criticisms of your article who attempt to point them out only to be rebuffed and insulted? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:33, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::Based on? [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 23:21, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
It's fascinating to watch other people guide your behavior, User:Conservative. --[[User:SteveK|SteveK]] 23:50, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

== Something doesn't add up ==

You have no time to take part in the ''The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings'', you told Rob Smith that you could talk to him at best for a couple of minutes a month, but you find six hours to ''compose'' this little ditty? [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:10, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
:這是多麼用戶：保守的卷。 :) [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 09:28, 30 September 2011 (EDT)
::"This is how the user: a conservative volume"?--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 09:31, 30 September 2011 (EDT)

Conservapedia:Community Portal

2011-09-30T01:29:41Z

SeanS: moving sections from andys Talk page to commun. portal, lets stop spamming andy folks, ok?

<center>''This is the place to discuss issues of interest to the Conservapedia community.''</center>
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
[[Conservapedia:Community Portal/archive1|Archive 1]]
==How do I request/apply for upload rights?==

I would like to, in economics articles, to upload low resolution Bloomberg screenshots that demonstrate how the economy has actually gotten worse under Barack Obama. In my short time here, I have mainly contributed to economics articles, which is my speciality, including the featured article on the [[Federal Debt Limit]]. [[User:HP|HP]] 01:08, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:I would recommend asking at [[User:Aschlafly]] talk page. He will review your edits. Expanded user rights are granted on a [[merit system]]. See: [[Conservapedia:User rights]]. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:56, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
::I would like to request as well. It would make it a bit easier, as I have had requested images for articles I was working on and it took a while to get the first singer ones.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 20:14, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I tried for the First Lady articles and was told I hadn't edited enough. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 20:18, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
HP, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Federal_Debt_Limit&diff=prev&oldid=876420 this edit] is problematic; it looks like malevolent [[parody]] ("pervades the inner city culture greatly") and have advised Mr. Schlalfy of my opinion. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:51, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:Parody? You're kidding me, right? Nah, I call it as I see it. Obama does not take personal responsibility, will not take personal responsibility, and this is typical of the inner city culture, which is pervaded by a handout culture. It's funny how you insult my work when you piggybacked off of my contributions on the debt ceiling article and most of my work still remains. I have two MS degrees (Finance and Statistics) and my criticisms, even if you think they're politically incorrect, are factual. {{personal remark removed}} [[User:HP|HP]] 23:15, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
::Funny, Rob comments on the edit, and you return with a personal attack. You might want to watch that. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 23:19, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Rob, that wasn't personal, that was factual. It is factual that I laid most of the foundation for the featured article, which is not disputable. You then built upon this foundation with your upload rights and made it a featured article (for which you should be commended). But don't call me a parodist when you leave most of my contributions in the article. That is intellectually dishonest. [[User:HP|HP]] 23:32, 3 August 2011 (EDT)

== Blocking policy, RobS, atheists/evolutionists, deleting/oversighting and misc, ==

Here are a few comments for the record and a few comments:

1. I am not against improving CP's blocking policy and suggested a blocking review board [[User:Conservative/blocking-board-framework|HERE]].

2. In terms of blocking policy, I am somewhere between Karajou and RobS. Karajou is on the strict side and RobS is more on the permissive side. For example, I recently got someone on the liberal/evolutionist side of the aisle unbanned because their revision was correct on an article relating to a creation related topic.

3. Karajou and Andy are probably going to be more active than me at Conservapedia at least in the near future. Furthermore, given there is a lot of content at Conservapedia with multiple editors, I don't agree with all of Conservapedia's content. In addition, I don't agree with all the decisions that have been made in the past concerning Conservapedia which is not surprising as all websites/organizations make mistakes. With the above being said, realistically, if RobS wants to continue to be a drama queen and call Conservapedia a @$#%hole and refer to me as being "demonic" offsite (Is hissy fit, internet armchair "exorcist" commentary respectable behavior? No, it is not) plus engage in other unbecoming unnecessary tactics and drama, he is not going to get much cooperation from his fellow Sysops, from myself and from Andy. RobS is going to have to learn to be less hot-headed, show more self-restraint and engage in more constructive behavior. In addition, he is also going to have to repair some bridges in order to gain back trust. Already, he has lost his check user rights and his siteadmin rights.

Also, I had some strong words concerning RobS recently this was mainly due to his pestering me and his offsite behavior. If RobS truly believed I was "demonic" I am sure he would have approached Andy about this matter and his decision to engage in this behavior offsite shows his lack of conviction and it is merely a example of his hissy fit drama queen antics. The truth is that he didn't like being ignored by me so he shot off some hot-headed nonsense.

4. I have a feeling that if I do more in the future to get involved in blocking policy at Conservapedia it will be with someone like Iduan who I have had pleasant communication with in the past.

5. Evolutionist/atheist editors are going to have to be more realistic. Andy, Karajou and others are never going to allow the website to go pro-evolution/atheism or attempt to go neutral on these issues because they know evolution/atheism is nonsense and often just window dressing for people not wanting to live under biblical standards of conduct. There are a lot of other topics that they can contribute to and I would suggest covering other topics.

6. I feel no obligation to respond to or debate obscure atheists/evolutionists at Conservapedia. I am content that my material on these subjects gets a significant amount of internet traffic. Plus, I have responded to comments in the past and there are several pages of talk page archives. If more well-known atheists were to offer an attractive offer, I would consider debating them, but I am not going to lose any sleep over it if this does not occur as I believe they are often cowards (see: [[Daniel Came]]'s recent commentary about [[Richard Dawkins]] and [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]) and the fields of evolutionary biology/atheistic philosophy/secular religion and its promotion is filled with charlatans. On the other hand, Christianity has a great amount evidence supporting it and there is an abundance of websites offering excellent resources produced by scholars and others - see [[Christian apologetics website resources]].

7. I really don't fill any remorse about deleting vandalism or clearly inane comments in the past. For example, if someone says "Atheism is true because I say so" or posts some other nonsense that is often misspelled (public schools in too many cases produce atheists who can't even spell atheist, atheists and atheism) I can't say I lose any sleep in deleting it and I don't believe I did a great deal of deleting comments like these in the past. There is [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|no proof and evidence for atheism]] and as mentioned above there is a [[Christian apologetics website resources|great deal of evidence for Christianity]]. On the other hand, I have responded to atheists/evolutionists in the past on the talk pages of atheism related content and also taken some suggestions in terms of the content. I can't predict the future in terms of vandalism/malicious behavior, but with that being said I do think I will do less oversighting/deleting in the future. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:19, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
:*''I don't agree with all of Conservapedia's content. ''
:Why don't you just come out and say it: you don't like Andy's [[Conservative Bible Project]].
:Now, my question, who on the open wiki, or in private discussion lists, gave you the permission or authority to speak for all of Conservapedia in "Conservapedia's challenge to ...(fill in the blank)...."?
:*'' I am sure he would have approached Andy about this matter ''
:I beleive I did here. [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=888699]
:*''suggested a blocking review board ''
:You would need editors to man the review board, which you don't have.
:*'' I do think I will do less oversighting/deleting in the future''
:And I thank you for that. It's unfortunate this disagreement got as large as it did, but that's all it ever was about. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:55, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
[[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:55, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
::RobS, given that I posted concerning you, I read your above comments on the off chance you might respond with a sincere and constructive response. That didn't happen. Unless something dramatic happens, I don't see myself inclined to read your future postings at this wiki or to read emails sent to me from you. Second, if memory serves, I thought I had commented on the [[Conservative Bible Project]] (CBP) earlier at this wiki or at the very least commented on what is required to do good Bible translation/exegesis, but I cannot find it on the talk page of the project. As far as posting on the CBP, maybe I posted on the talk page for the main page or the talk page for Andy's user page. I doubt it was oversighted. With that being said, I do think I should post on the talk page of the CBP and point out what I see are the major flaws of the CBP in terms of its approach. Good Bible translation uses some of the same principles as good Bible exegesis and these principles are explained [http://www.godward.org/archives/BS%20Notes/Basic%20rules%20for%20NT%20exegesis.htm HERE]. If you click that link, obviously good Bible exegesis/translation requires a lot of work to determine original intent and it is also very methodical. I also don't like the name of the project and it will become apparent why once I post my objections to the project on the talk page of the CBP. Lastly, I have expressed criticism of other CP content and expressed my misgivings at various times. Other times, I chose to remain silent as I didn't see it accomplishing anything in terms of the content being changed. I do plan on expressing my misgivings about some CP content at a later time when I think it is a more opportune time. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:02, 8 August 2011 (EDT)

:::*'' I cannot find it on the talk page of the project''
:::Well, duh, you probably deleted and oversighted it.
:::*'' I do plan on expressing my misgivings about some CP content at a later time when I think it is a more opportune time.
:::We're all waiting with baited breath. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:18, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

== Rude and insulting behaviour ==

Could someone please step in here. I made a simple, polite and non-contentious comment and another user has sought to [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Atheism#Deceptive_statement_by_John_Calvert insult me and question my faith]. This is extremely insulting and it is not the first time the user has done this. I have given my soul, heart and life to Christ and for someone to suggest otherwise is saddening and offensive. No person should treat others this way. Someone please intervene and remind this user that they should not insult others in such a fashion. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:34, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
::Seems to me like standard operating procedure around these parts. You might as well complain about the sky being blue. [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 22:40, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
:::The same user has now taken to insulting me and questioning MY faith, simply becaue I disagree with him about the best way to oppose evolutionism, and nobody else seems to be making any attempts to curtail his offensive behaviour. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 19:42, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
Max you wrote at this wiki: "Thanks for your kind words. I am not a catholic I am afraid and don't think I'll ever be one! '''I have however found Christ! Turns out he was in my heart all along.'''" (emphasis added). Setting aside the Catholicism issue, this is not in accordance with biblical doctrine. Ephesians 2:11-12: "Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world." Unless you were writing unclearly, something sounds amiss. See: http://www.free-online-bible-study.com/become-a-christian.html and this http://www.godssimpleplan.org/gsps-english.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
::I am sorry my poetic language has confused you. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:37, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

==Discussion on reversion (from User talk:Jcw)==
Please stop reverting comments you don't like and calling it trolling. Valid criticism is just that, valid criticism. Are we (you) so thin skinned that any critical comment must be reverted? Keep that in mind. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:57, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:His last revert was to remove something vulgar, and the offender was rightfully called a troll. JCW will continue to do so as he sees fit. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:01, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::Thanks for the support, Karajou. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:34, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::Seems to be that those with blocking rights (i.e me, you, Jcw etc) are able to do what they want without repercussion. Are we trying to build a conservative community or just enjoy power over others I wonder...[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:21, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Well, exactly who are we blocking, and what do you know of him that is so vital we shouldn't be blocking him? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:24, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::I know nothing of the user, I just see those with extended privilages oversighting, deleting, blocking, harrasing and isulting others while being totally unable to respond to any criticism with patience, understanding and rationality. Not particulalry Christain. My Christianity teaches me forebearence, kindness and understanding which is what I see a lack of here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:36, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::That's right, Max, you know nothing of him, yet I and a few senior sysops as well as Andy had the displeasure of having this clown here. All you're seeing is "sysops playing the bully", yet you're not seeing an individual who refuses to change his past behavior, refuses to respect the site, refuses to change himself at all. Jesus did not tolerate sin; he told sinners to quit sinning. We're not going to have someone shove his way into the site and demand that we compromise with him. We're going to shove such an individual right back out that door with the demand that he change his own ways or go elsewhere. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:47, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Who are you talking about here, and can you provide a diff of the eggregious offense? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:48, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Just one of the many intolerant malcontents that you are so desperate to get back into this website. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:20, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::I'm sorry, Karajou, but you simply do not have clue what you are talking about.
:::::::::I have been explicit since day one: Conservapedia needs a coherent blocking policy. Conservapedia needs Sysop standards of conduct. Conservapedia needs a mechinism whereby real life persons who feel there may be incorrect information about them have an avenue to present their case. Unfortunately, you have helped to set a standard that eradicates any discussion of these serious issues which have plagued this project since its inception.
:::::::::And you can begin right here and now by ceasing innuendo, false judgments, and unwarranted conclusions about other [[good faith]] contributors.
:::::::::And you can begin constructively engaging in this discussion thread by simply providing a link (i.e., diff, or evidence) that was requested. Elsewise, your intervention here is [[Conservapedia:Trolling|trolling]], nothing more. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:56, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent) RobS, look up - this discussion was started by an editor complaining about another editor being blocked, but without providing any diffs. He later admitted that he knew nothing about the blocked user, instead making general insinuations about behaviour of sysops. It's not up to Karajou or me to provide diffs, it's up to the complainants. So far I've seen no evidence even purporting to show unfair blocks by me. If anyone shows any, I'll gladly address it. I'd also like you to address the fact that you seem to be working to help these trolls and parodists against CP. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::Jcw, thank you for responding; this is indeed a discussion on ''reversion'', not blocking. The request was for a diff on, what Karajou refered to as, "a vulgar" comment. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:43, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I can't say which case Karajou has in mind, as no usernames were mentioned by the editor who began this discussion, but it may have been one of the many Horace socks we've had recently. They all left similar comments on various talk pages futilely begging for an intransigent troll to be unblocked. I'm sure you'll agree that those comments were intended only to sow discord and start arguments - that's how trolls operate. By getting involved in this inconsequential affair, you're giving them exactly what they want - discord on CP. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:48, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::So, there is essentially no checks on a sysops conduct. They can act arbitrarily with impugnity. As to reverts, it would be nice if (a) only the most eggregious, outrageuos, over the top, off-topic, intended to disrupt talk page edits we're ''immediately'' reverted; (b) a reverting editor would look, first, to see if the editor was actively involved in an ongoing discussion, particularly where ''other'' editors are involved, and particularly if a sysop or other editor with enhanced user rights are involved with the editor whose comments are being reverted. The net effect has been, and User:Karajou & User:Conservative are guilty of this, of '''disrupting''' ongoing discussions. Not everyone is present in real time in any discussion. If an editor makes an incivil, disruptive, or off-topic comment, the editor should be politely warned, either in the context of the active discussion, or on his/her user page, about a possible infraction. If the comment demands an immediate time-out, care should be taken to place the personal remark template and '''''not''''' disrupt the ''other'' editors who are involved in a discussion. Way too often, editors who in no way are involved in a discussion, show no concern whatsoever to ''other'' editors ''who are not complaining about the behavior of a participant, and totally disrupt an active discussion. This is extremely upsetting to all participants in a discussion, and rude behavior from sysops and blocking editors as well. Show some concern, some sensibility, to others, please''. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:45, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Max, your comments are way out of line. I'll be happy to hear complaints, but so far you're just throwing around insinuations. Critical comment has always been welcome on CP, but lots of trolls come here for no reason other than to make arguments. That sort of thing can't be tolerated; nor can uncivil or argumentative comments. Your own post above is undeniably argumentative in tone - if you can't express yourself civilly, how can you expect to be heeded? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:34, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::I have never been incivil on Conservapedia, not once and not to anyone. A look through my edits will show as much - I can hold my head high. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:36, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Calling people 'thin skinned' isn't terribly civil, and ending your first post with 'Keep that in mind.' can only be called peremptory. That's not really the point though - you admit above that you don't have any idea why this user was blocked or have anything to say in his defense, yet you come here and accuse us of 'harassing' people. From where you're standing it might look that way, but why not treat us with some forbearance and understanding? There are large numbers of liberal vandals who actively plot to undermine this project, so naturally we block a lot of new users - anyone who makes a new account and immediately starts arguing about the vandals' favourite points is clearly a troll, so why try to reason with the unreasonable? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:45, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::You and Karajou make good points...about blocking! I think reverting anything other than obscenity rather than actually addressing and blowing the complaints out of the water with a reasoned argument is why I made the "thin skinned" comment. I have skin like rock which means I never need to revert anyone because nothing gets to me! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::Sorry to butt in here, JCW, but it seems as if editors with blocking privileges are being indicted as a whole, so I'll add my two cents.
:::::Max, here's the thing: some things just don't belong here, and those things go beyond simple obscenity (although that's certainly one example.) Libelous comments, for example, do not belong here. Nor do endless debates that aren't going to be productive. When someone comes here to argue over why liberal ideas aren't portrayed more sympathetically, that's simply wasting time and space. Conservapedia makes no secret of the fact that it's a conservative site. We don't portray liberal ideas more sympathetically because they're bad ideas, plain and simple.
:::::It's a bit like dealing with telemarketers. You try to be polite at first and say "Thank you, we're not interested," and they persist. You say it again, more firmly, and STILL they persist. How long should you allow them to continue before simply saying "Goodbye" and hanging up on them? It's undoubtedly rude, but so's not taking "no" for an answer. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 20:58, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Yes, you're all to be commended. The POV that conservatives are closed minded snobs, and suspected liberal trolls are to be banhammered from the git-go because they might say something witty and catch us off guard and make us look stupid is the watchword. Go to it. STOMP STOMP STOMP. Make sure this community never grows. Karajou blocked a fellow just cause he claimed CP said something unfair in his biographical scetch. We can have none of that. Reason? Fairness? Forget it. They're all trolls, including anybody who complains about CP's lack of accountability. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:57, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I agree with Rob on this - I have been sneered at, jeered by and had my faith, '''my faith''', questioned by a CP sysop. I have no doubts that any other user would have been banned immediately. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:03, 10 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::::::How can we NOT question, Max? When you consider the number of people who come here proclaiming to be dyed-in-the-wool conservatives and Christians, only to turn around and vandalize the site, it's difficult not to be paranoid. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, personally, but there have been more times than I care to remember where I've given someone said benefit and then looked like a gullible fool when they went on a vandalism spree shortly afterwards. Now, you seem like a sincere enough person to me, and I'm willing to take you at your word--but I don't spend nearly as much time here dealing with wave after wave of parodists and vandals as the sysops or some of the other editors. I suspect that if I did, I might be a lot more suspicious and (as you put it) thin-skinned. In any event, I don't want to fill up JCW's talk page with third-party discussion...but do try to see it from our position, if you would. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:38, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::''but do try to see it from our position'' "our" is also "me" because I am just as much a user as everybody else. But more to the point I have been here awhile now (can't remember exactly when) and i am demonstrably a good faith user. Andy has promoted me twice and I have been polite, candid and have also ushered vandals out. So I do understand your position because I am in it! My faith was questioned simple because I asked some basic questions. It is extremely offensive and I have no doubt if I were to call into question Karajou's faith, for example, I would be quickly shown the door. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:44, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::Might I suggest, if similiar behavior were to occur from a CP Sysop in the future, remind them [[Conservapedia:Guidelines#Civility]] states,
:::::::::::*''Conservapedia Administrators as well need to interact with others according to the same standards of civility we ask of editors,''
::::::::::::and [[Conservapedia:Administrator%27s_Guide#Civility|Conservapedia:Administrator's Guide#Civility]] states,
:::::::::::*''Conservapedia Administrators are expected to afford registered users the same standard of editing etiquette, decorum, and interaction you yourself, and the Conservapedia project as a whole, require and appreciate from others. You must be civil. No bullying.'' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:06, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

==a perspective from a pianist==
MaxFletcher and RobSmith both bring up some excellent points, which certain sysops would do well to listen to rather than dismiss out of hand. In my own experience, I've also had my integrity, goodwill, and even faith belligerently questioned numerous times on this site for daring to disagree on the smallest matters of detail in relatively benign articles -- I never even touched the more ideological corners of the site. The first few times this happened, I fought back; the personal nature of the attacks which some sysops past and present have engaged in and continuously engage in as ''modus operandi'' is hard to take lightly. Naturally, in the power dynamics of this wiki a sysop is allowed to personally attack a lowly editor with impunity, but any talkback from the attacked editor is worthy of a stiff block; my own logs reflect this fact. After this cycle had happened several times, I learned to be more, well, Christian about the whole matter, and to repay brutish speculation with an attitude of somewhat bemused grace.

But the bottom line is, I originally came here to help build an educational resource. My contributions, beginning in early 2009, are the best evidence of that. Now, it's hard to see the point. Conservapedia has simply not progressed as an educational resource in the last two years. The only "original" content consists either of high-profile projects so extreme as to be rejected by the mainsream conservative community, or nonsensical "parody" pages which form their own small feedback loop (since for whatever reason their author does not welcome suggestion or comment). The core elements of any encyclopedia are still sorely lacking, since this site has a way of driving off people who actually know what they're writing about. It has essentially been reduced to a collection of fiefdoms owned by the small pool of sysops left. The sysop "community," if you can even call it that, has been fighting amongst itself in the ugliest, pettiest possible way. Obvious abuses are going on as a result of this fight between Conservative, RobSmith, and Karajou, with several innocent users being blocked for no reason other than as some sort of bizarre collateral damage. Most disappointing has been the absence of leadership in this from Andy, as he's the only one who could have defused this conflict.

My whole time here, I've heard it argued, "well, we're a 'conservative' project, and anyone editing here has to accept our zero-tolerance policy towards liberalism." In that case, I do not see why this project remains run as a wiki, when the editorial wishes of its administrators would be better served by the much simpler blog software. After all, on a blog you can moderate, delete, or even disallow reader comments, you can fix all of your errors without leaving a trace, and you don't have to put up with anyone changing or haggling over what you write. The wiki software was designed with goals diametrically opposed to this, namely to encourage transparency and collaboration, what Andy would call "the best of the public," and this guiding philosophy behind the wiki idea can only be subverted by clumsy abuse of some of its tools. Unfortunately, this is exactly what happens at Conservapedia with alarming frequency. You can object, revert, and engage in silly block wars with RobSmith all you want, but you ignore his attempts to instill sysop accountability at your own peril.

My two cents, for what it's worth. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 17:02, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Thank you JDW for your well thought out comments and I'd like to echo your position. This is, at its base, a conservative encyclopedia and, as such, should not accept liberal positions in its main-space. It also deals with religion and science. Now, not all religious perspectives are the same. I am a Christian but I don't inject it into my politics (as politics, in my view, is a human affair) nor into how I view the age of the earth (because it simply isn't relevant to me). But because of the non-relevence of creationism to me I have been jeered at and accused of being an atheist. All because I simply pointed out to User:Conservative that his 15 question had been answered and I was curious about why he keeps saying they haven't. He calls them "faux" answers but refuses to elaborate on what that means. I have been insulted for merely asking simple questions and had my comments deleted. This is why I originally posted on Jcw's page because I saw the wholesale deletion of comments which I thought was unfair - granted I didn't know the user was apparently a long-term troll but to say it was vulgar when I have had worse vulgarities directed to me by a sysop I found the whole thing curious and wanted to draw attention to what I viewed as a double standard. As to the Rob vs. Karajou: I have no opinion. Neither of these users seem right or wrong and both have treated me with fairness so I won't get into that debate. Mainly I want to see leadership, responsibility, and fairness from all users. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:19, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

::This has taken rather a tangent from the original discussion. In fact, JDW and Max seem to have taken the opportunity to return to an old saw by having yet another dig at Conservative while ignoring the point of this thread. If you don't like Conservative's Evolution article, make your own in your userspace and build a consensus on it; going on and on about your dislike of a sysop is not a productive way to spend your time. Meanwhile we'll carry on keeping the trolls at bay. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:27, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::You have completely missed the point I am afraid. I have never even read the Evolution article! I never mentioned I disliked anyone either. I dislike having my faith questioned and my simple questions rebutted with childish accusations. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::(edit conflict) Sorry, Jcw, but I have to agree with JDW and Max. I'm not sure if you were around at the time, but more than one sysop has routinely ignored the guidelines and chosen to block users and IP ranges on a personal whim. In each case they were revealed to be liars and parodists. This '''is''' a Conservative and Christian wiki, so there should be no problem in everyone - including the sysops - obeying basic rules. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 17:31, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::I didn't miss that point, I ignored it. If you want to complain about the behavior of sysops, there's a proper way to do it. Inserting these serious accusations against a senior sysop into an unrelated discussion is extremely unhelpful. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:33, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::No, there is not now an established, proper way to complain about sysop misconduct. This is another example of CP's stunted growth. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:59, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::So you ignored the main thrust of what I was saying and made a totally unrelated point and argued I was wrong? That is called a strawman. Secondly these are not "serious accusations" these are ''facts''. [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Atheism#Deceptive_statement_by_John_Calvert Here conservative questions my faith] and this is but one page and [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#S._Africa_and_Question_Evolution.21_campaign_-_Everything_you_post_must_be_true_and_verifiable here again he displays open hostility towards me] for asking simple questions. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:38, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::My point, to re-clarify '''again''' is that vulgar statements from one person is treated differently from those of a sysop. I am not taking a "dig at conservative" i am using him as an example. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:39, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I would agree with this assessment, questioning a persons professed religious faith is vulgar. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:03, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Coming from the man who didn't have the evidence (nor chutzpah) to call me "demonic" at this website and resorted to posting his allegation at a cesspool website, I find RobS's comment rather amusing. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:35, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent)Max, please pause and consider what you're saying and where you're saying it. This thread has nothing to do with Conservative or with how sysops talk to editors; it's about me blocking someone. That question has been settled now, and Conservative never entered into it. If you'd like to criticize him, please do it elsewhere. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:You keep introducing strawmen. No, it was never about blocking - it was about reverting which I have clarified twice: my initial comment was "Please stop reverting comments you don't like and calling it trolling. Valid criticism is just that, valid criticism. Are we (you) so thin skinned that any critical comment must be reverted? Keep that in mind." Now I am trying to point out that vulgar comments have been directed at me by those in a sysop position so we needs blanket civility standards that apply to all - what would happen I started reverting conservatives rude comments towards me? Would I be banned? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:51, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Moved from above. If you must continue in this vein, do it here. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:57, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:I have removed your dishonest section title. Don't put words in my mouth. I am talking civility here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:00, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

(EC) I made this a section of its own, to allow for a broader discussion. IMO the most important point mentioned by the pianist is
:'''Most disappointing has been the absence of leadership in this from Andy, as he's the only one who could have defused this conflict.'''
But that's only me: instead of Andy's guidance we have a couple of sysops who all claim that they act according to his wishes, or perhaps with his silent support. The only action taken by Andy over the last couple of days was to revoke some of RobSmith's rights. It's left to the augurs to interpret these signs... [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 18:01, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:Agree with RonLar. I do not wish to snipe with you Jcw, lets us mend our rift.. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:04, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

==And end to this==

Max: I don't want to snipe with you either, or with anyone. All I'm trying to do is prevent the kind of heated argument that hurts this site and brings joy to the parodists. As you've no doubt inferred already, I'm not prepared to discuss Conservative's editing style - it's far above my station to do so. If you'd like to do that, please do, but do it somewhere appropriate - a fresh thread on this page, for example. However, I ask you for your own good and that of the site to consider your words very carefully and avoid anything that might inflame tempers or provide grist for the trolls' mills. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 18:17, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

== TracyS edits from the same IP address as RobS ==

TracyS edits from the same IP address as RobS. No wonder why TracyS was such a loser. Once again, RobS, "the greatest lawgiver and rule giver since Moses and Hammurabi", is breaking a Conservapedia rule. Way to stay on top of check user Karajou. It looks like RobS keeps slipping further down the moral high ground. First, he removes the protection from my "castle" and now this. Tsk. tsk. tsk. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:01, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

:May I draw you attention to [[Conservapedia:Proxy IP]]? For someone who thinks that he can keep his gender a mystery you are jumping utterly fast to conclusions about others! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 07:39, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::They have the same IP address. I can point out many things, but I will point out another thing. Both RobS and TracyS had an inordinate interest in my user page talk page layout despite Conservapedia saying a user's talk page is his/her castle. That was the clincher for me in terms of TracyS being a product of Rob's socketpuppetry. If only RobS had chosen not to pester me. I wonder if RobS pokes sleeping dogs and then complains if they bite him. Many of RobS's self-imposed problems could have been avoided merely by the absence of "pesterfesting".[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:10, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

::*You're articles are quite noticeable, so many (including me) have an interest to talk to you
::*You make a farce out of Conservapedia's saying that ''a user's talk page is his/her castle'': the main intention of a talk page is to allow for communication. This communication can be moderated - in Conservapedia's case ''heavily'' moderated by the user. Your treatment of your talk page doesn't further communication...
::*RobS was pestering you? *LOL*
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:36, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RobSmith relies on proxies because his personal web connection has trouble with Conservapedia.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 12:27, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::So do a lot of vandals, but in this case there's more than a dozen individually-named socks. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:29, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::The fact that there are many accounts created from an open proxy fails to persuade that Rob = Tracy. Did Rob also use the same Canadian proxies Tracy used? Did Rob ever edit from the same Kansas City IP? In combination, that might be more compelling. Then again, do Conservapedia administrators need to persuade anyone but themselves to act? [[User:BradB|BradB]] 12:45, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::And how do you know a Canadian proxy was used? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:53, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That is an excellent question. I can't see how he can know unless he's a sock of one of the parties in this. Perhaps there's another explanation, BradB? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:37, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I found out by checking the block log, which you can find by going to TracyS' userpage and clicking "View full log". [[User:BradB|BradB]] 20:02, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
(unindent)Ah yes, so I see. Thanks for that. I also notice a rather unsavory comment in there from RobS regarding another sysop. This is starting to look very unsatisfactory. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 20:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

== User:Conservative ==

I take up an idea by Jcw to create a separate section to discuss User:Conservative. It is necessary to do so on this page, as his habit of blanking his own talk page (and keep it protected most of the time) makes a discussion meaningless over there.

Over the last days I tried to engage User:Conservative in a meaningful exchange of comments. I thought that this shouldn't be that difficult, as User:Conservative has often announced that he was willing to debate more or less skillful public orators, like R. Dawkins, PZ Myers, or some chap called Penn Jillette.

I wondered what made User:Conservative think that this is a good idea - his only motivation can be that even ''bad publicity is good publicity''. But there is not the slightest chance that any original good publicity comes from this: As the last days have shown that User:Conservative is lacking any skills for taking part in a debate.

A couple of times I asked him to show me to a talk page where he successfully debated with someone about [[Atheism]], [[Evolution]], etc. ([[Talk:Atheism and obesity#Via several weird redirected talk pages... |see here for example]].) There should be hundreds of such debates on talk pages, as User:Conservative generally claims that anyone criticizing his pet articles is a atheist, evolutionist, Darwinist, etc.

User:Conservative couldn't give any link. In fact, the main tactic of User:Conservative when confronted with awkward questions is a strategic withdrawal (sometimes after creating a fog of youtube-videos, baseless accusations,...) Examples: [[Talk:Evolution#We have decided that the article will not be changed in any major way.|(1)]], [[Talk:Evolution#The effects of the Question Evolution! Campaign will be devastating to evolutionary belief and atheism|(2)]] [[Talk:Evolution#Evolutionist science professors are cryin' to their mamas about the Question Evolution! Campaign|(3)]],[[Talk:Atheism#Dubious quote by John Calvert|(4)]], [[Talk:Atheism and obesity#Via several weird redirected talk pages...|(5)]] Obviously he hopes that his interlocutors get blocked, and that then he can delete (or archive) the whole episode into oblivion: out of sight, out of mind.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:28, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::You're only figuring this out now? He's been doing this since, like 2007 or so with the full approval of the administration. Why would you expect anything to change? [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 11:41, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar, I can see you are very frustrated. I would be frustrated too if I was an obscure atheist/evolutionists with no real evidence to offer for atheism/evolution. Lastly, I wouldn't call atheists PZ Myers or Penn Jillette skillful orators. For example, Jillette's speech is littered with obscenity. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:46, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

And again, no link to any talk-page where you showed your brilliant wit, where you outshone your opponents, where you were able to score actual points against your interlocutors, where you left the onlookers aghast, standing there in silence while admiring your abilities to lay out an well reasoned argument.

Why not? Because there is no place, not even here at Conservapedia, where anything remotely resembling such a discussion ever happened.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:18, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

== I suggest convening a panel on refining Conservapedia's blocking policy ==

I suggest convening a panel on refining Conservapedia's blocking policy.

Here are my suggestions:

1. I think every active Sysop/Admin should be on the panel; included in the mix should be a few senior editors with blocking rights who would be considered for sysop rights. Another Sysop agrees with me on this.

2. Given RobS's recent behavior (annoying/pestering sock of TracyS and about a dozen other socks I have been told, etc. etc.) and his recent loss of Admin rights, I suggest that he not be on the panel.

3. I suggest starting off with a clean slate and archiving this page's current content. The panel's deliberations could then commence here. Perhaps, a more civil tone would ensue. I also suggest that sockpuppet comments be reverted as far as commentary on the panel's deliberations plus brand new editors who are merely trolling.

4. I suggest that Andy weigh in on the final product.

Please let me know if you think such a panel is necessary and if you think the above suggestions are good suggestions.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:13, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:Seems like a good idea.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 13:30, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::Likewise. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:38, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
::::I am asking others to get involved in this section. For near term decision making, does archiving much of this page to start things off with a new slate sound good. Please vote below. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:41, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Well, I suggested it and got told it wouldn't work, but I still think it's a good idea, provided at least two things are included: 1) an appeal process that's open and transparent involving disinterested editors and sysops and 2) accountability on the part of the blocking editor. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:21, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:I am in, I hav e already laid out some guidelines elsewhere on Conservapedia. I am commited to to making CP fair and a happy place to edit. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:43, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
:::The Conservapedian Iduan has expressed some interest in helping refine Conservapedia's blocking policy. He is currently on a summer vacation. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:55, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall. Here are the people who signed up so far:

*[[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysops and Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

*[[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysop candidates with blocking rights]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:14, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

:::I sent an email to Iduan to find out when his vacation is over. I expect to receive a reply within 2-7 days. In the meantime, people who are going to be on the blocking policy refinement panel may want to look at these two pages: [[User:Iduan/Blocking Review Panel Ideas]] and [[User talk:Iduan/Blocking Review Panel Ideas]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:17, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::The panel is convening on 8/17/11: [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings]][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:59, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

== Please vote - archiving much of this page's content to start off with clean and more civil slate as far as blocking policy refinement panel forming - see above ==

Please vote - archiving much of this page's content to start off with clean and more civil slate as far as discussing blocking policy refinement panel forming (I think every active Sysop/Admin should be on the panel; included in the mix should be a few senior editors with blocking rights who would be considered for sysop rights). By the way, the panel deliberations could occur elsewhere. I thought the community portal though would be a good place and perhaps allow for this community portal to be used more constructively henceforth.

'''Yes votes:'''

Yes. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:44, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. In my opinion much of the discussion on this page consists of editors who've got hot under the collar and written intemperate things. A continuation of this sort of thing can only be bad for CP. A future discussion of related points must happen in a more organized and civil way. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:47, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 13:58, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. --[[User:AlejandroH|AlejandroH]] 16:12, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 01:32, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

'''No votes:'''

(EC) ''For near term decision making, does archiving much of this page to start things off with a new slate sound good. '' I assume that this was a question. Answer: No, it doesn't sound good. Please archive only those sections to which no user has contributed for more than one week. Thank you. [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:45, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. Attempting to bury the past doesn't deal with the valid questions already present. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 14:31, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. There have been some valid concerns raised, and "archiving" the page would be the equivalent of pretending those concerns were settled without actually answering them. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 15:31, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

No. But since when has anything here been decided by voting? The vote was something like 30-5 against RobS losing his sysop rights (can't be certain, since that page has since been unceremoniously burned.) Even if 75% of his supporters were parodists (unlikely) he still had majority support from the non-sysop editors. The decision here is going be made by the usual suspects, regardless of the outcome of this "vote". --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 15:37, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

Archive it or not, it really doesn't matter. The conversations took place and they can't be taken back. Given some of the behavior I witnessed after RobS lost his admin rights, I'm very cynical about any changes occurring here, but I'm willing to try. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:30, 12 August 2011 (EDT)

=== A question for the ''ayes'' ===
Would you have voted for '''deleting''' the archives, too? [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 16:04, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Yes. While there might have been some good points in those discussions, the vast majority was name-calling by troublemakers, trolls and sockpuppets. Keeping it around gives a false impression of the site, which is exactly what the troublemakers, trolls and sockpuppets want. If any of the discussion in those archives was worthwhile, I'm sure it'll be brought up again in a more orderly fashion. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
== Why were the archives deleted? ==

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:50, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

:I second that question. "Starting off with a clean slate" should not mean burning all of the old discussions. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:00, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::A community is not a dishonest fool, his sockpuppet(s) and his atheist website vandal pals and their sockpuppets. No reason to provide an audience for such a spectacle. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:07, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Well, that is an answer, but not a very good one. Where was the vote on deleting the archives? Are you intending to single-handedly delete the current archive as well? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:15, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::I found out the non-syops blockers I needed to invite so I de-archived the material. I wanted the notice about the panel not to get buried too far down the page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

==On archiving==
By the way, I notice that Conservative has archived the recent discussions already. Since when does a 5-5 vote mean "yes, go ahead with it?" [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:01, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::It was 5-4. Sharon, was neither yes or no. It was "it does not matter". [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
:::That was up to interpretation. Anyway, how long did you have the vote up before closing the matter? By my count it's less than 12 hours. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:16, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

*the vote was up for less than 20 hours: that's an absurdly short time-
*it's even more absurd to vote on the minor matter (archiving, but preserving information) and act unilaterally on the big issue (destroying of information)
*To quote Sharon: ''The conversations took place and they can't be taken back.'' You are certainly trying, Conservative!
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:17, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Most of this page served as an attack page on several individuals, and that's going to stop. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:22, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::Karajou, there were also allegations that sysops have personally attacked editors. Those were "archived" without discussion of the issues. Do you have a comment on that? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 09:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Then they had better specify the reasons why these editors were attacked, and if these attacks were clearly for nothing, then I am open for sysop demotion; but if these alleged attacks were caused by the editors themselves through fighting, bad conduct, or the deliberate posting of false information, then they have no room to talk. For the record, the reasons why I will remove someone from the site are posted under the warning tag on my talk page. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:39, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

*Ah, love, peace and happiness at last. And quietness. The last may become a problem, as Andy Schlafly seems to enjoy record-breaking numbers of unique visitors, and these will be hard to come by when the contribution goes back to the level of the last quarter of 2010.
*And there are still attacks left on this page, like this comment about Rob Smith: ''(annoying/pestering sock of TracyS and about a dozen other socks I have been told, etc. etc.)''
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:56, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar: A few comments: 1) Western liberalism is running out of other people's money (Asian money, etc.) 2) Conservatism and austerity budgets are on the rise in the Western World so conservative websites should experience some growth 3) Conservapedia does plan on reviewing and improving its block policy 4) At an opportune time, perhaps in a few years, I may unveil a plan which I think Conservapedia may be more receptive to which I believe could increase its viewership. By the way, how many websites have you considerably added traffic to? My guess is none so your "expert" opinion has little weight. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:46, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

::::Did you post this in the wrong place? It doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 11:53, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:# ''Western liberalism is running out of other people's money (Asian money, etc.)'' And that is relevant because....?
:# ''Conservatism and austerity budgets are on the rise in the Western World so conservative websites should experience some growth'' And that is relevant because....?
:# ''Conservapedia does plan on reviewing and improving its block policy'' That may be a very promising development...
:# ''At an opportune time, perhaps in a few years, I may unveil a plan which I think Conservapedia may be more receptive too which I believe could increase its viewership.'' In the fast moving world of the internet, such intricate plans are of relatively little value.
:By the way: could you show me to a talk page where you successfully debated with someone about Atheism, Evolution, etc.? Thanks
:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:58, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RonLar, who said my plan was intricate? :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:26, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::I found out the non-syops blockers I needed to invite to the panel so I de-archived the material. I wanted the notice about the panel not to get buried too far down the page. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:48, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

== A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall ==

A blocking policy refinement panel is meeting in Summer or early Fall. Here are the people who signed up so far:

*[[User:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysops and Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

*[[User talk:Conservative/Sysops who want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel|Sysop candidates with blocking rights]]

I am sending an email to [[User:Iduan]] to determine when he is returning from his vacation. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:16, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:Just returned; first: sleep; then: back to business.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 17:01, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
::I have blocking rights. May I join?--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 17:10, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:::I added you to list. I don't think there will be any objections to me doing so. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:58, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

==Response to Karajou==
I told Andy yesterday I would respond to these baseless charges today, but spent the better part of the last nine hours blocked after User:Conservative flip-flopped, reverted himself, and unblocked me (I'll accept your apology later, User:Conservative, for inconveniencing me). But to Mr. Karajou: you seem to be of the opinion that,
:'''A little leven leveneth the whole lump.'''
That would be true, if Conservapedia were a monolith, requiring ideological conformity. But it's not, and never has been. Let's not forget the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares,
:'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Tares#Narrative An enemy hath done this]. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest.''' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:29, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
Here is the evidence that I am aware of:

1. Both RobS and TracyS edited from the same IP address. After Karajou pointed this out, I personally confirmed this matter.

2. Both were somewhat obsessed with my talk page design in an annoying way despite the fact that Conservapedia says a user's talk page is his/her castle. At the time, I had a system for leaving messages to me. I have since closes my talk page for leaving messages due to RobS and his atheist pals use of pestering tactics.

3. Both were dishonest. For example, RobS claiming he referred to me as demonic at Conservapedia which he never did as he knows the charge was baseless plus he didn't have the guts to do this at Conservapedia, but instead chose to do this at an atheist gutter website that is filled with obscenity and gossip. TracyS claimed he/she was not trying to annoy me about my talk despite using language purposely meant to annoy.

4. Both were annoying and needlessly argumentative.

5. Karajou claims there were multiple sockpuppets of RobS, but I have not personally investigated this matter.

RobS is still an egotist and has learned nothing. It would be a big mistake at this time to give him back his Sysop/Admin rights. He would just foment a lot of useless drama and nonsense. Conservapedia doesn't need RobS the egotist to change its blocking policy and a panel of which he is not a part to refine its blocking policy is far better suited to the task. I invited people to take part in such a panel and some have accepted my invitation to take part in the panel.

I did block RobS earlier for a short spell due to him being disruptive to me posting a notice in this room that would be more constructive than much of the current content which I archived. However, with another Sysops's assistance I was able to send out invitations to the appropriate parties so the notice at the community portal was no longer needed so I unblocked RobS and de-archived the material. Given his past behavior, I see no reason to apologize for any inconvenience this caused RobS.

I will now let RobS give his empty sales pitch on how his desysoping was all a misunderstanding and a mistake on Aschlafly's part. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:28, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
:User:Conservative, I told Andy yesterday I would respond here, but was prevented by you and the whole day was wasted. Also, I see the whole page & its Archives have been vandalized, as well as other users private user space, so I hesitate in wasting anymore time here. I will however, respond with this:
:'''"pesterfesting"''': this is the term User:Conservative uses for what is commonly refereed to in the outside world as '''"[[Advocacy]]"'''. An advocate is a person who acts on behalf of others who are incapable, or have been prevented from acting on their own behalf. Two examples of advocates would be, (1) [[Andrew Schlafly]], noted attorney, and (2) [[Jesus Christ]], [[savior]] of the [[planet]]. Advocacy is very common in the world of wikis, but I can see where you would have difficultly with the idea. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:57, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
:::RobS, in retrospect, I believe your "pesterfesting" was just a petty and narcissistic post TK power grab which tried to show others that you were the "big man on campus". Second, I am sorry to hear that you couldn't find other things to do besides edit Conservapedia and that your whole day was wasted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:07, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

== The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun ==

The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun and can be found [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings|HERE]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:16, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

== Android App? ==

Does anyone have the link to the android app? I am unable to find it for some strange reason. [[User:JacobSmith|JacobSmith]] 22:05, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
:I am an Android user. Nothing exists and was likely a person having fun with lies.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:14, 20 August 2011 (EDT)

== My Testimony ==

I was a liberal atheist. About two weeks ago, I was talking to a Conservative friend of mine and she pointed me to the site conservapedia.com. So I came here and read a few articles. Then read a few more. Then when I noticed registration was open, I signed up, but didn't contribute right away, but I kept reading. I read [[Christian apologetics]], [[Counterexamples to Evolution]], [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]], [[Counterexamples to Relativity]], [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]] and some wonderful essays too numerous to list. While reading, I felt...something. Something I haven't felt since I was a child. Yesterday, Sunday Morning, I did something I haven't done in nearly 30 years: I went to church. It was wonderful and I do believe I felt the Holy Spirit. I don't believe I deserve to call myself a Christian yet, but I'm looking forward to next Sunday. :-) Thank you all. --[[User:OliviaB|OliviaB]] 13:51, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

== Summer Paper Gone Bad ==

Summer is drawing to a close and school is beginning again. I have decided to write my essay on the origin of the moon, citing Conservapedia several times. When my teacher (this is a public school) gave me my paper back with the grade an all, he gave me a 62. In addition, he gave me a "good talking to" on not using Wikipedia. I tried to explain him that Conservapedia is different, he just wouldn't listen! He gave me the opportunity to do the paper again using different sources. I don't want to use different sources, because they are most often plagued with bias. My question is simple- how do we separate ourselves from Wikipedia to the general public, and how to we improve our reputation? --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 17:13, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
:Wikis are not normally considered good sources for research as they are generally open and can be edited by anyone. And any decent teacher (public school or not) probably won't accept an encyclopedia of any kind (hard copy or online) as a source for a research paper, as they normally want the student to actually do some research. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 19:06, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
::William, the good news is you were docked points for your sources and not for content. That implies that your teacher has an open mind. I'd suggest Answers in Genesis, A Storehouse of Knowledge, Creation Ministries International or look at some of Ray Comfort's books. Of course, these sources are all the work of man and are therefore always biased and flawed. For the truth, you'll want to turn to the Bible. --[[User:OliviaB|OliviaB]] 19:57, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

== An open apology to Conservative and Aschlafly ==

I was [[User:WalterS]] and made an inappropriate comment several months ago. Then two days ago I signed up again under the name JefferyA and tried to make some contributions to the Conservative dictionary. I was banned by [[User:Karajou]] for my actions as WalterS and told that I could come back if I apologized. I am therefore offering my apologies to [[User:Aschlafly]] and [[User:Conservative]]. I am sorry. It was wrong to vandalize your site. I know I don't deserve to stay, but if you can find it within you to allow me to, I would very much appreciate it. God be with you. --[[User:JefferyA|JefferyA]] 09:23, 6 September 2011 (EDT)
::Your sentiments are appreciated. With the being said, to the best of my knowledge Mr. Schlafly is the sole owner of the website. My articles tend to receive web traffic, but for the most part I create articles and I have blocked some vandals as well. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:09, 23 September 2011 (EDT)

== Banned user ==

Conservative recently banned SamCoulter for "putting garbage into article". However, the 'garbage' was a legitimate point backed up by a valid reference. Indeed, the same reference has been cited by Conservative on the main page. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 23:07, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
:This is a non-starter. Conservative is a senior admin with tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of quality edits. This is a meritocracy, David. [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 23:36, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
::Almost 5% of his "tens of thousands" of quality edits are minor edits. He also created 4 different articles all with the same information as a main article. From what it seemed, SamCoulter was just trying to bring more facts to the table. Three months seems too excessive for something that wasn't even explained as to "why it doesn't belong". [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 23:52, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
:::I don't agree with Conservative's articles on this topic. That said, I did not get the impression that SamCoulter meant what he posted as a serious contribution, but rather simply as an attempt to "prove a point". He basically [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:SamCoulter&curid=114914&diff=920263&oldid=920262 admitted the same himself, and called himself "juvenile"]. One should consider those facts before drawing any conclusions. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 00:14, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Nice job taking things out of context. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 00:32, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::I do not see how I am doing so. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 00:55, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's like people who quote verses from the Bible (specifically Leviticus). They quote what they want and not its entirety. He admitted what he did was juvenile, but he felt he had to do it that way to bring attention to a topic that Aschlafly appeared to be ignoring. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 01:04, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::SamCoulter behaved in a manner which, by his own admission, was juvenile, and as a result was blocked. That is the topic being addressed in this section. The issue of those articles, and what position Mr. Schlafly takes or ought to take with respect to them, is a separate discussion which does not belong in this section. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 01:17, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
Getting back to the point; Conservative banned SamCoulter specifically for "putting garbage into article". However, the 'garbage' in question was fully-referenced material, indeed it used the same reference as Conservative had on the main page, and SamCoulter was pretty much quoting what the referenced article stated. The number of edits an admin has made is irrelevant when it comes to determining whether a particular block was justified. A block must be judged according to the specific circumstances of the case, not the past activities of the admin doing the blocking. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 09:26, 24 September 2011 (EDT)

== re: User: LeonardS wanting to debate User: Conservative ==

Don't you have ANYTHING to say about my challenge? There's no need to run away; if you don't want to debate a simple "No thank you, I'd rather not" will be quite sufficient. I mean, it's not like I'm some sort of power-crazed vindictive bigot or anything. '''voiceoftruth2006''' --[[User:LeonardS|LeonardS]] 03:16, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Have you read [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] yet? There is hope and healing available. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:27, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:Interesting article. But it is not necessary to be obsessed with you, dear User:Conservative, to spot some inconsistencies between some of your statements and your actions: one can look into the logs of Conservapedia (your log-entries can be found [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=Conservative&page=&year=&month=-1 here]). E.g., you stated on 31 July 2011 (and repeatedly after this date):
:::'''''I am not going to be very active at Conservapedia for the near term. '''''
:On the other hand, you performed more than 5,200 logged actions after that date - as many as the next three busiest sysops (Aschlafly, Karajou and Jpatt) '''''together'''''. Generally your behavior doesn't change, whether you announce to have ''a full schedule in the following 90 days'' or not.

:You achieve this remarkable output by contributing to Conservapedia without much pause: over the last three days I couldn't find a period where you have been away from the computer form more than 6 1/2 h: you should try to avoid to have this lack of sleep to have an influence on the quality of your contributions.

:But this is not to uncommon for you: you can go for a nearly a whole day making pauses of half an hour, or for a couple of days without resting for six hours at a time. The only other sysop at Conservapedia who would do the same was TK. Now, it's clear why he showed this pattern - his illness didn't allow him to sleep for more than a precious two, three hours.

:Your fellow sysops failed to spot TK's problems. I'm afraid they keep up this habit of ignoring disturbing signs in other editors...

:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:10, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::Ronlar, I don't think it's very appropriate for you to be bringing up medical conditions in a public place. --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 09:16, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Sorry, I didn't want to bring up ''medical conditions'', I just made some - as I hope helpful - observations, without offering a diagnosis. BTW: is [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] a medical condition?
:::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:25, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Definitely not in the DSM --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 09:50, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::RonLar, setting aside whether your observations are correct about my sleep patterns and your apparent obsessiveness about my editing and sleep patterns, I will point out to you that some people don't need a lot of sleep and a cursory knowledge of history is all that is needed to know this. But I will make the allowance that perhaps you are an atheist that went to public schools and didn't learn much about history because you didn't apply yourself. With that being said, here is a list of famous people in history who didn't need a lot of sleep: [http://amolife.com/personality/great-people-sleep-less.html Famous people who didn't need a lot of sleep]. So even if you did obsessively log my time at Conservapedia (see: [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]]), you certainly have to take that into account. Plus, to my knowledge, there is no rule at Conservapedia indicating that people cannot share an account. Just out of curiosity why do you think there are some atheists who are very obsessed with myself and Conservapedia? I can assure you the obsession is not one that is mutually shared as the lives of obscure atheist vandal community members are not exactly riveting. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:02, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::''you maybe an atheist who want to public school and didn't learn much about history because you didn't apply yourself.'' I have had enough of your insults Conservative. Just cease it and be respectful of others as commanded: ''And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all ... (2 Timothy 2:24)''. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:15, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

User:Conservative, thanks for reacting to my comment. Let's have a look a it - I hope just answering to you won't get me blocked:
*''to my knowledge, there is no rule at Conservapedia indicating that people cannot share an account'' No, there isn't, and there have been examples of this practice: [[User:History]] and [[User:CPanel]] spring to mind. Of course, you could be many - and this would explain you turning down even an audio debate. But you look more honorable seen as a single person:
**in all your challenges you use the ''1st person '''singular''''': ''my articles'', ''my work'', etc. It would be deceitful to create this impression when asking Dawkins, Jillette (and others) to a debate, who must assume that you are a single person. And you won't be that deceptive, I hope?
**it would be lovely to read your ''manual of style'' which would be necessary to keep up your profile. This could be an excerpt:
::{|class="wikitable"
|style "background: lightgrey"|
#Don't use the preview button!
#phrase of the month: '''<s>with regards to</s> <s>obese</s> bestiality''' Use it often!
#Really, don't use the preview button!
…
|}
*''I will point out to you that some people don't need a lot of sleep'' An interesting list of famous people you are giving there. But keep in mind that ''sleeping'' is not the only thing which prevents you from editing Conservapedia. Even living today, those celebrities would have difficulties to keep up a 18-hours-a-day pattern of editing, as they would have ''jobs'' (''you certainly have to take that into account'') - Frankly, could Thomas Edison have invented anything if he would have been detracted by the Internet for most of his waking time?
*''So even if you did obsessively log my time at Conservapedia […] '' That's the fun of the WikiMedia software - I don't have to log your time, it's done automatically for me...
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 02:22, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

== Atheists from a vandal website want to debate User: Conservative ==

Adding cowardice characteristics:

I've just found out 2 major characteristics for cowardice:
*Trying to discredit opponents in view to avoid the confrontation
*Asking for unreasonable conditions and refusing the confrontation if those conditions are not fulfilled.
Would this be acceptable characteristics ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:57, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
:::One thing I do know is that obscure atheists who are members of vandal sites have to actually make a substantial donation to a Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability certified Christian relief organization and have a Bible believing pastor do the transaction for them before I would consider debating them since atheists have a penchant for deception (see: [[Atheism and deception]]). Oh by the way, I may challenge another well known atheist to a debate such as [[Penn Jillette]]. Given that there are 300 less atheists in the world every day and 80,000 more people everyday calling themselves Christian (see: [[Global Christianity]]) and that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will no doubt create ex-atheists and/or prevent people from becoming atheists in the first place[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I], perhaps it is better to wait so I get more favorable debate terms (I do realize that prominent atheists are often too chicken to debate and of course this trend may continue though (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). :) On the other hand, after the atheist population has been whittled down through conversion to theism, perhaps prominent atheists may be desperate to debate anyone in the future. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:37, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Is it a matter of them being too chicken to debate, or do they simply fail to see why they should make a "substantial donation" before debating an anonymous blogger? No offence, but if someone told ME that I'd have to hand over a few thousand dollars before he'd debate me, I'd think he was making excuses. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 14:58, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Also I don't really get the thing about deception. I mean, I see some guy challenged you to an audio debate. If you arrange the audio hookup then he doesn't appear, that's a victory and it proves your point. If he DOES appear then you get to beat him in the debate. The whole thing with the money does sort of look like a way to get out of challenges, if you look at it from their point of view. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

::::And what do fat Christians need to do in order to debate you about how CP treats people with weight issues? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 14:59, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:See my response to you at: [[Talk:Atheism and obesity]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:55, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Just to confirm - you refuse to discuss with me the way CP demeans obese people by linking them to everything a conservative Christian finds negative (atheism, homosexuality, feminism, etc.) and refuses to present anyone who is obese in a positive light. (Don't throw health issues into the mix: we both agree with the information on those.) --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 16:11, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
User:Conservative, you asked for '''17,000$''' (or even '''20,000$''') to be donated to a charity. For this money, one could get a celebrity like R. Dawkins to speak on this matter, in person. Getting this money for a written debate (though not given to you, but to a charity), you most certainly could enter the [[Guinness Book of Records]]! So, could you link to a debate here at a talk page at Conservapedia showing your debating skills? To prove that you a worth this kind of money? Just link us to a discussion where you think that you did exceptionally well! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 15:19, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::If obscure internet atheists who are part of a vandal website don't want to meet my terms, I have no problem with that. The atheism and evolution articles that I largely created (which they cannot find one factual error in) certainly do not want of readership so I am certainly not desperate. I would ask though that they do not whine about the matter like typical socially challenged internet atheist nerds. :) ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men. In short, quarrelsome nerds (see: [[Atheism and women]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Do you honestly think it's reasonable to expect people to pay $20,000 to debate - in writing, not even live - an anonymous blogger, then accuse them of cowardice for deciding that they'd rather have a new car? Sorry, I disagree. If you really wanted to debate atheists you wouldn't be doing all this nonsense with the money, and you'd jump at the chance when it was offered. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:53, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Thomas, would you like some cheese with that whine? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:56, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:You didn't answer my question. Do you think it's reasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 for a written debate with an anonymous blogger, then accuse them of cowardice for declining to do so? I don't think you actually want to debate atheists, or you'd have taken up the offer from that voiceoftruth guy. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 15:58, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Did I not challenge the atheist Penn Jillette to a debate? I may challenge other non-obscure atheist as well (see comments above). :) By the way, if you could resist the temptation to engage in further whining, I would appreciate it. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Penn Jillette is, as you have pointed out, not obscure. Do you expect him to reply to a challenge from an anonymous blogger? He's WAY above needing to worry about that. As far as I can tell here you're the one that's whining, because yet again you've ignored my question about exactly how reasonable it is to demand that people pay $20,000 for a written debate with an anonymous blogger, then call them cowards when they don't feel like throwing their money away. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:08, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::I am a Christian and I will debate you on the topic of Atheism and Obesity. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:09, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Have not other Christians challenged Penn Jillette to a debate? Has Penn Jillette ever debated a Bible believing Christian? Face it, he evolved into a chicken! (see also: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:13, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Max, I still think you are an atheist and an evolutionist. You certainly whine when I post material unflattering to atheism/atheist community and evolutionism enough. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:13, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:Stop changing the subject. We're not talking about Penn Jillette; we're talking about YOU. Why do you make such unreasonable demands then accuse people of cowardice for refusing to meet them? To demand $20,000 for a written debate with an obscure blogger is absurd, and it's also dishonest, because even when offered the money you still declined. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:16, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::Jesus Christ is my savior, Conservative. Whether you believe me or not is not a concern because ''He'' knows it true. I whine about poor scholarship, I don't care what anyone says about athesits but it must be grounded in ''fact''. Hence I will debate you on the topic of Atheism and Obesity right now, right here. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:18, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::That sounds like a fair and reasonable debate offer to me. [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]] 16:19, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Is all of this really necessary? Yes, it is rather unusual for Conservative to request compensation for engaging in a debate given his lack of celebrity status, but you should still take into account that he's asking for the money to be donated to charity, not paid directly to him. He won't actually gain anything from the offer. [[User:RyanK|RyanK]] 16:23, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::It's not a matter of where the money GOES; it's the fact that it has to be paid in the first place. User:Conservative is not a prominent figure; he's just an anonymous blogger. The idea that anyone would pay $20,000 to debate him is laughable. Well, ALMOST laughable - an offer has actually been made, which he refused after quickly changing his rules. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:34, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I think it's fairly obvious why he wishes to remain anonymous. This page alone shows how much harassment he would face from trolls were he to reveal his identity. The internet isn't a nice place, and people are always on the look out for ways to have fun at another's expense. I believe the term is 'lulz'. He has every right to protect himself from that. [[User:RyanK|RyanK]] 16:43, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Then he should expect others to do the same and not label them as 'chicken'.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::And he should also accept the fact that if he insists on remaining anonymous nobody's going to be stupid enough to hand over $20,000 to debate him. After all, what recourse do they then have if he fails to participate? If someone's paying that much for a debate it's perfectly reasonable for them to demand a proper contract laying down the conditions, and you can't do that if you don't know who you're meant to be debating. No, it's just a ploy to let him CLAIM he's willing to debate without ever actually having to do it. This was demonstrated when Jeeves at RW offered to pay the money, and User:Conservative still refused to debate him. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 16:51, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
Conservative, I am willing to debate with you if you agree to give $20,000 to charity. If you are going to refuse my offer, you may be a chicken. I would as well agree that you do not reveal your identity. (No whining in this offer)--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 16:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Setting aside the matter of how desirable it is to be a celebrity, it does appear that some people are forgetting the press have quoted/cited my work (Chicago Tribune, St. Peterburg Times, LA Times, etc.). Of course, the Chicago Tribune and St. Petersburg Times quoted my work in a much more favorable light than more liberal press outlets being they are more conservative publications than many press outlets. In addition, gentlemen with doctorates in relevant fields have linked to my work. Of course, many of my atheist detractors are very aware of the press quoting my work, but being jealous, obscure, quarrelsome [[Essay: 10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd|atheist nerds]] they certainly are reluctant to admit this fact. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:54, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Can you link to these press outlets and people with doctorates citing your work? I am curious to read them. Also, what about my debate offer on Atheism and Obesity? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::First, I hope the 'atheist nerd' does not refer to me. Second, can you provide the links to these press articles ? Third, I think I am neither jealous, obscure nor quarrelsome... So why would you refuse to debate me ? Unfortunately, I am not wealthy enough to spare $20,000 for a debate but you will agree that lack of money is not a sin.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:03, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Irrelevant. We're not talking about press coverage of your work (do you have any links to support that, by the way?) but about the ludicrous conditions you attach to debates, while at the same time claiming that atheists are too scared to debate you. Well they aren't - you've had two offers from atheists in the last 48 hours, plus two more from fellow Christians, all of which you've avoided or refused - and it is dishonest of you to make this claim. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:05, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Max, Veritas48 was a kind and thoughtful Christian apologists at YouTube who was harassed in very inappropriate ways by atheists. [[JP Holding]] had an obsessive atheist call his wife at work. If you think I am going to allow some obscure, socially challenged atheist nerds (see: [[Atheism and women]]) to needlessly hassle people with doctorates who like my work and have cited it, that is not going to happen. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:12, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Harassment like continually calling them chickens, mocking their weight and farcical accusations bestiality? What about newspapers that have cited your work? How about my offer of a debate? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:24, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Again, that's not relevant unless you're saying that you're refusing to debate because you insist on anonymity. I don't see how an audio debate is going to affect that, so why did you refuse? And surely you realise that to ask people to pay $20,000 when they have no legal recourse if you don't attend the debate is completely unreasonable?--[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:17, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Thomas, bring some non-obscure atheists to debate me with reasonable offers to debate me via written debate or pony up the $20,000 to be given to a ECFA certified Christian relief charity that is requested of me to debate obscure atheists who are part of vandal websites. It's that simple. Deal with it and stop whining. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:22, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Conservative, people won't pay $20,000 to debate with an obscure christian nerd. No whining here.--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yet AGAIN you have avoided the question: why do you impose such ludicrous conditions for a debate then accuse people of cowardice for not meeting them? If you genuinely want to debate atheists why don't you - as an obscure blogger - do so without demanding that they hand over $20,000 with no assurance other than your word that the debate will ever happen? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:25, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::Oy, Reminder, Keep the discussion civil.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 17:29, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I'm certainly willing to avoid the word "ludicrous" in future if other participants stop calling people cowards, quarrelsome nerds or socially challenged, and agree to stop questioning the faith of the Christian participants here. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:33, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Agreed to avoid calling others 'obscure nerds'--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:35, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::By the way, given that: 1) each day there are 300 less atheists in the world and 80,000 additional people who call themselves Christian each day (see: [[Global Christianity]]) 2) The [[Question evolution! campaign]] will cull the atheists population further.[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I] - I certainly may up the amount obscure atheists who are part of a vandal website must donate to a Christian relief organization in order for me to debate them. :) And of course, given the way that [[Ben Bernanke]] prints money, inflation is certainly a consideration as well. Also, I do realize it is often difficult to find non-obscure atheists who are willing to debate (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]), but I certainly would look at reasonable debate offers from such individuals. :) 17:43, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::I am offering you a reasonable debate on the topic of Atheism and Obesity. I am not a "quarrelsome atheist" or anything else. We can have a written debate here on conservapedia right now or at an agreed time. Why are you avoiding this offer yet calling everyone else a coward? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:49, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::For the same reason as he avoided the offers from Jeeves, Ace McWicked and voiceoftruth2006, I imagine. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:52, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I don't know who those people are...? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:54, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Jeeves and Ace McWicked are two members of RW who each offered to pay the required $20,000 for a debate with User:Conservative; even so, he declined. voiceoftruth2006 is a YouTube atheist who offered to debate him two days ago; he ignored the offer. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:57, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Gee, if I had a spare $20,000 I certainly wouldn't be offering it up for an internet debate! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:01, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::::It's probably quite safe to offer it to Ken; after all, if history is anything to go by he's not going to accept. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:03, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Excellent response, Conservative! Your intelligence level is obviously very, very high. [[User:AverageJoe|AverageJoe]] 17:47, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::How long do you intend to continue avoiding my question? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 17:44, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Oh I give up, it just doesn't make any sense...--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 17:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Conservative, do you think your comments on this page give a promising preview of your debating skills? Frankly, after reading your non-answers I have difficulties to imagine someone to pony up 2$ for the pleasure to have a written debate with you. But perhaps you can increase your market value by answering my question above:
::''So, could you link to a debate here at a talk page at Conservapedia showing your debating skills? To prove that you a worth this kind of money? Just link us to a discussion where you think that you did exceptionally well!''
Thanks, [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 17:52, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::Jeeves and Ace never showed that they had a trustworthy Christian to make the donation which certainly was a condition to debate. I did suggest giving the money to a Bible believing pastor of their choosing, but of course, that never happened. I understand that obscure atheists who are part of a vandal site don't like my debate conditions, but I think it is safe to say that this does not keep me up at nights. :) My back is not against the wall - it is the atheist population that is shrinking the world each day while the conservative Christian population appears to be exploding in numbers each day (see: [[Global Christianity]]). :) Keep squabbling amongst yourselves quarrelsome [[Essay: 10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd|atheist nerds]] (see: [[Essay: Atheism: A house divided and in global decline]] and [[Elevatorgate]] and [[Atheism and women]]), while God keeps expanding the Christian population! :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:26, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::So Aschlafly isn't a trustworthy Christian? I mean, they DID offer to give the money to him. Anyway you still haven't answered my question, have you? Do you really think it's reasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 to debate an obscure blogger, with no legal assurance that the debate will actually take place even after they've paid, then call them cowards when they decline to do so? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:32, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Hi Conservative, my comments may have been lost on this page so please see [[Talk:Atheism_and_obesity#Reasonable_debate_offer|here]]. Thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:33, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

I'd just like to say that I think Conservative is not a coward and that he would debate if he could find a worthy opponent. Also, it is inappropriate to discuss this issue in public. --[[User:JohnCD|JohnCD]] 18:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:That's your opinion, of course, and you're entitled to it. However as Conservative frequently discusses the cowardice of atheists on this site he can hardly complain when his own willingness (or otherwise) to debate crops up, can he? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:49, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Thomas, what was stopping Jeeves and Ace from giving the donation to Bible believing pastor of their choosing to give to a Christian relief organization? Were they unable to find Bible believing pastors? Are there no Bible believing pastors in their country or in the world? I am sorry, but their bluff was called and shown to be the farce that it was. Please feel free to blather on today, but don't be surprised if I disregard your blather. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:57, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::What was stopping them giving the money to Andy Schlafly? I'll tell you what was stopping them giving it to a vicar; they didn't trust you and they wanted a properly witnessed and signed contract that legally committed you to doing the debate once the money had been paid. And you STILL haven't answered my question! You're just an obscure, anonymous blogger; don't you think it's utterly unreasonable to demand that people pay $20,000 to debate you, with no assurance that you'll even attend, then call them cowards for not doing so? --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 19:02, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::User:Conservative, if you have the courage of your conviction then debating anyone about what you are sure is right then should be easy. Yet you avoid. Harding filling those who are watching this with confidence. I believe this to be an Encyclopedia where getting to the truth should be paramount. This can only be done by debate and a free exchange of ideas. Not be nit-picking the motives of those who wish to discuss things and come to a valid and provable conclusion[[User:Aortuso|Aortuso]] 03:04, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
I am going to be frank. The idea of debating obscure atheist members of a vandal site is repugnant to me and I don't see much value in it. It would be the equivalent of negotiating with terrorists which I think is generally a bad practice and to be avoided if possible. I would need to see a lot of good come out of it, hence the requirement that these people donate $20,000 to a Christian relief organization. I also see a lot of trends that don't bode well for atheism both in the Western World and Eastern World so I think the [[decline of atheism]] will continue (deficits causing budget cuts to liberal Western public universities, further decline of the liberal mainstream press audience, tough economic times causing individuals to turn back to God, [[Question evolution! campaign]], explosive growth of [[global Christianity]], etc. etc.). Of course, this further reduces my incentive to want to debate obscure atheists. Lastly, there are some personal things which I put off doing that I wish to attend to. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:57, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

:Strange. I thought that converting these atheist by using your superior debating skills would be a kind of reward in itself. How do you intend to help to cut the ''squeak'' of atheists in half if you are unwilling to engage them? Is this the reason that the [[Question Evolution!]] campaign is oriented to churches - which are the most unlikely places to find a atheist to convert him (or her)? And surprisingly, you are willing to speak with the ring-leaders, the ''top terrorists''! If you don't think yourself to be fit to move the heart - and brains - of the ''obscure atheists'', what do you think you can accomplish by speaking to the more famous ones? Oh wait: do you have a secret rhetorical device which can be used only once - and you try to optimize its impact? Sorry, those things work only in the fantasy of little boys plotting in their super-secret tree-houses...

:[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:01, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
RonLar, I think the type of atheists who are part of vandal websites or the type of atheists who harassed Veritas48 at YouTube are the bottom of the barrel and are not the type of people who are good candidates for engagement. Jesus advised Christians not to cast pearls before swine. Second, I have always claimed that due to the weakness of atheism and the strength of the Christian position that it doesn't take exceptional debating skills to prevail and that is why a 15 year old boy can win debates with adult atheists as can be seen [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSo9hW2dOBo HERE]. Next, in most cases there is a reason why obscure internet atheists from vandal websites are obscure. Few people are interested in what they have to say. Lastly, tracts are designed to be evangelical and the [[Question evolution! campaign]] tracts are no different. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 08:47, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

=== In Short..===
You are saying that [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]], [[User:DavidZa|DavidZa]], [[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]], [[User:SharonW|SharonW]], and [[User:ARamis|ARamis]] are vandals/atheists? [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 12:09, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:I am getting tired of these false accusations: Proverbs 3:30, ''Do not accuse a man for no reason, when he has done you no harm''. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:14, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
== Behaviour of Conservative (again) ==

Andy, Contrary to the wishes of every CP editor who has posted here, [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] has added some more disgusting articles about bestiality: [[Bestiality and Sweden]], [[Bestiality and Britain]] and (no joking) [[Denmark, Sweden, evolutionary belief and bestiality]]. What's more, he's protected these pages so no other editor can get rid of them. This whole stupid bestiality stunt by Conservative is making CP a complete and utter joke.

1. If I or any other editor blocks him for a short time to make him cool off, he'll simply revert the block. Will you please block him? Give him a week to get those animal images out of his head.

2. Will you please delete his disgusting pages on bestiality?

3. Will you please consider whether or not there's any point in a well-intentioned editor (like me) contributing to an encyclopedia which is just turning into a joke because of the deranged activities of an out-of-control editor who has a high level of administrator privilege? [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 17:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:First things first...
::1. You're going to successfully refute the bestiality edits posted. Either the individuals or countries cited have made claims pertaining to their support of bestiality, or they didn't.
::2. You're going to explain how yourself, a recent contributor to this website, can justify the removal of a senior administrator who has been here from the beginning; this explanation is contingent on you being able to satisfy condition number 1. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:37, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::1. These articles run contrary to the founding principles of this site in that they are utterly inappropriate for family viewing.
:::2. Personally I have no interest in "the removal" of User:Conservative, just some of his offensive articles.
:::Karajou, I urge you to move beyond a reflex defense of User:Conservative and to look at the harm being done to the reputation of this site. One of the reasons I have used Conservapedia as a reference instead of Wikipedia is that it doesn't contain references to extreme deviance. These latest articles violate that principle. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 17:44, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::And what harm is that? What harm is actually being done to this website? What exactly is the harm that this website is engaging in by telling the public about a disgusting sexual practice and those who promote it? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:50, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I can help with number one in that [[Bestiality and Britain]] doesn't have any mention of Britian and actually pertains to a British study of Sweden and has nothing to do with Britain - hence should be deleted. Also, [[Atheism and bestiality]] again says nothing of atheists - the only connection is that Peter Singer himself is an atheist. I actually can't check any deeper as I am on a shared network and don't want these articles on the logs. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:45, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

::::1a. Well, I have no direct information about the claims of bestiality of course, not least because no hard, verifiable data is given in any of the articles Conservative cites.
::::1b. Bestiality is illegal in Britain, unlike in many US states - including some of the most conservative states such as Alabama. Would you like me to add an article about "The USA, conservatives and bestiality" just because some weirdo in Alabama might be doing it with a dog? That makes as much sense as Conservative's stupid articles about atheists and bestiality.
::::2. Because this senior administrator is completely out of control, making a total mockery of the website. Think about it for a microsecond - please... He clearly needs a cooling-off period to stop thinking about such weird stuff, let alone putting on a website which is supposed to be family-friendly. Some of the other senior administrators need to get a grip. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 17:52, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::You have ''"no direct information about the claims of bestiality"'', by admission, so all of this is just another attack on Conservative by whiners who cannot or will not offer anything beyong whines and rants, and this has been going on in one form or another by select individuals for years. My message is simple: it stops NOW. You're going to respect him, or you're going to leave. Period. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:03, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::I am not going to mention Conservative but, Karajou, I would like to point out my comment above - particularly as you said ''the individuals or countries cited have made claims pertaining to their support of bestiality, or they didn't.'' The Britain article says nothing about the practice in Britain. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:12, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::If Conservative - or any other user - is wrong, then you ''politely'' say so, provide evidence to back up your claims, and then drop the subject. That is how it works here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:26, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::That is what I have already done I thought? The [[Bestiality and Britain]] article does not mention bestiality practices in Britain hence needs to be renamed or removed. thanks, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:29, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Karajou, the guiding principles of the site take precedence over everything else here, except the Word of our Lord. I quote from the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]:
::::::::::''"Everything you post must be true and verifiable"'' - people have already pointed out that "Conservative"'s study is neither of these.
::::::::::''"Any content you create ... must be family-friendly"'' - these articles '''clearly''' are not family-friendly.
:::::::::In other words, these new articles by "Conservative" are in violation of two of the founding principles of this site. By your own standards, they must be deleted. I'm afraid that the onus is upon '''you''' to explain why these articles remain, in violation of the standards defined by the site's owner. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 18:50, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
I think that it is very disrespectful to keep bringing this debate to Andy talk page. It is obvious that he does not want to get involved in this, and you should respect his decision. --[[User:AlejandroH|AlejandroH]] 18:55, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:Max, Is the Bible family friendly? What are your thoughts about these verses of the Bible: Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21 ? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:45, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::Well, that is a slightly facetious argument. You can't compare the Bible, and the laws of God, to Conservapedia firstly and secondly Conservapedia, unlike the Bible, has an explicit Family Friendly rule. And please address the fact that [[Bestiality and Britain]] has no mention of Bestiality and Britain. Just to be clear - my quarrel isn't with you ''personally'' but at the poor scholarship. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:53, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Khalid, atheism is madness and immorality is commonly associated with atheism. When people read about topics such atheism, it is not surprising to many people to read about odd/bizarre/weird things and people committing sinful acts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:58, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::The history of liberal opposition to my articles [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS8rpt1y6lk&feature=related reminds me of someone.] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:12, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::Just because someone has problems with your articles doesn't make them a liberal. [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 21:14, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

== Andy, are you reading your Talk page? ==

If so, please read the section above (Behaviour of Conservative) and please take a decision on which way you want CP to go: family-friendly encyclopedia or weirdo blog. [[User:KhalidM|KhalidM]] 18:08, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:That's very black and white. When making an argument try to avoid those.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Khalid, atheism is madness and immorality is commonly associated with atheism. When people read about topics such atheism, it is not surprising to many people to read about odd/bizarre/weird things and people committing sinful acts. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:58, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Can this section be removed? It is a waste of space since I'm sure Mr. Schlafly reads his own talk page. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 21:16, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

Why don't we move this entire discussion to the Community Portal? I am sure Mr. Schlafly doesn't appreciate all the bickering on his talk page.--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 21:23, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

User:SeanS

2011-09-29T02:47:07Z

SeanS: GIANT BOLDED TEXT IN ALL CAPS!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!

Fear my userbox filled userpage >:D

*{{User Vandalized|3}}*

<big>'''GIANT BOLDED TEXT IN ALL CAPS!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!'''</big>



<big>'''I'm in my Freshman year of college so, I won't be available in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the Day''</big>--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! '''AA'''
! '''CC'''
|-
| '''AA'''
| ''AA''
| ''AC''
|-
| '''CC'''
| ''AC''
| ''CC''
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! Red
! Blue
! Yellow
|-
| '''Red'''
| Red
| Purple
| Orange
|-
| '''Blue'''
| Purple
| Blue
| Green
|-
| '''Yellow'''
| Orange
| Green
| Yellow
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Things
! Magic
! Science
! Religion
|-
| '''Storms'''
| Spells cast by Magi
| Water Vapor, electrical discharge and whatnot,
| God, possibly disfavor
|-
| '''Nat. Disaster'''
| Spells cast by a Magi
| Various causes
| God
|-
| '''Human Disaster'''
| Black magic causing chaos and problems.
| Various, usually Humans are Evil or stupid
| God, Demon, Human Will
|}

--
=About me=

*I love Astronomy, History, Video games, geography, geology, ect

I'm versed in the scientific views of the origins and of history (I don't believe it, but i find sciences story about how history went to be VERY entertaining and interesting)

I plan to teach history of a European variety.

I love video games, especially Japanese style rpg's.

I am a biblical, conservative non denominational christian

I'm Registered as a Non-Partisan Voter

==Favorite bible Quotes==

'''Revelation 21:2-4''' - ''2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ”Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”''

'''Ezekiel 18:23''' - ''”Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?”''

=userboxes=

{{User Christian}}
{{User straightforwardbiblereading}}
{{User windows}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User Youngearth}}
{{User NoEvo}}
{{User Donuthole}}
{{User American}}
{{User Not Obama}}
{{User Protestant}}
{{User Constitution}}
{{User patriot questions authority}}
{{User no death penalty}}
{{User anti-pot}}
{{User Soccer1}}
{{User Galactic Empire}}
{{User pubschool}}
{{User sysopother}}
{{User faveband|My Chemical Romance}}
{{User guncontrol}}
{{User antigun}}
{{User free speech}}
{{User nowar}}
{{User Interest}}

Talk:Muslim agenda of the Obama administration

2011-09-29T02:45:48Z

SeanS: /* So, */ new section

I seem to be missing something here since there are a few points I don't understand. First how is being sworn in using his full legal name part of pushing a Muslim agenda? Second how is putting more troops in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban (a fundamentalist Islamic government) a Muslim policy? [[User:WillB|WillB]] 13:22, 1 April 2009 (EDT)
:Using his full legal name when chastising others for using his name reeks of an agenda different than when he campaigned (worried about labeled Muslim before victory and unconcerned using his middle name after election). More troops to Afghanistan is a good thing in my view. I included it because it has to do with dealing with our Muslim enemies, so it is on his agenda. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:29, 1 April 2009 (EDT)
::Ok now I see were I went wrong. I was thinking from the introduction this article was going to focus on what Obama had done that could be seen as pro-Muslim and not include items that can be seen as anti-Muslim (more troops to fight an Islamic government) or that are only tangentially related to Islam (such as not using his middle name at first to try to avoid discrimination over possible Islamic ties in his heritage). Thanks for you quick response [[User:WillB|WillB]] 13:37, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

I have changed the opening paragraph so as not to reflect an anti or pro Muslim policy of the Administration's agenda.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:23, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

I am confused as to how dispatching more troops to Afghanistan to fight the Islamist Taliban is a 'Muslim policy' exactly? What exaclty does 'Muslim policy' mean - the inference from most of this article is that President Obama's policies are in some way Islamic (such as using his middle, Arabic name)?

: I disagree that the article is painting the policies as Islamic. Alright, the name thing is kind of pushing it, but that's part of a much broader debate across this site. As it stands, the examples all seem to be in chronological order, and many of them are (in my opinion, at least) genuine departures from the previous administration's method of dealing with the Muslim world. Time will tell whether they end up helping or hindering the "Contingency Operation." For now, I've modified the wording in the introduction to further clarify the article's intent.

: And for the record, I think we should remove the point about Obama seeking to hire Muslim congressional staffers. The only story resembling this that I could find from a major news organization said that a collection of the 45 most qualified Muslim Americans had been sent to the White House for consideration as part of a joint effort between Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and The Muslim Congressional Staffers Association. A quote:
:: ''A White House aide confirmed that the administration had received the resumes, noting that it was not unusual for the White House to consider lists of job candidates suggested by constituent groups.''

:: ''"We're still very much in the middle of the [hiring] process, even when it comes to very senior government employees. These things take time, and they're all based on finding the right fit," said the aide, who declined to be identified because he is not authorized to speak publicly for the administration.''<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-muslims29-2009mar29,0,176096.story</ref>
: It's looks like the administration has yet to take action on this. --[[User:SStaples|SStaples]] 22:43, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

:::Create a 'Muslim agenda of the Bush Administration'=) --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:49, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

== Obama takes a surprise visit to the troops in Afghanistan. ==

How exactly is visiting the troops fighting a war for our country part of a Muslim agenda? Did GWB reveal his own Muslim agenda when he did the same in Iraq and Afghanistan? Did Nixon reveal his, what, "Asian agenda" with his July 1969 visit to the troops in Vietnam? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 11:03, 4 December 2010 (EST)
:The answer to your questions- yes yes and yes. A visit to Muslim country, where are troops are stationed, with plans to visit Karzai is notable.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 11:31, 4 December 2010 (EST)

: I think you also have to note the timing of this trip, and what its main purpose was. Obama went on a day when there were many important domestic issues going on (lots on the Congressional agenda, not to mention the dismal jobs report that came out). Additionally, his main purpose was to speak with Karzai, and that didn't happen only because of weather and technical difficulties. --[[User:TeacherEd|TeacherEd]] 13:27, 4 December 2010 (EST)

== Somali Pirates ==
Lets say that Obama decided not to rescue the Captain. You could say his agenda was not to engage Muslim pirates. He order the successful release of the Captain. This means his policy or agenda toward Muslim pirates is shoot to kill. The only thing missing on this page with regards is the civilian trial and inprisonment of the remaining pirate. There is a case to be made that his agenda was to dither and that the Navy took it upon themselves to solve the crisis. Either way, there was an agenda here whether you agree.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:10, 31 January 2011 (EST)
:"'''There is a case to be made that his agenda was to dither and that the Navy took it upon themselves to solve the crisis.'''"
:The only thing Obama did in this case was to reiterate that the "troops on the ground" (so to speak) were free to act if they felt the life of the Captain was in immediate danger.

:From the page:
*Obama orders the successful rescue of American Capt. [[Richard Phillips]] from Muslim Somali pirates.

:I think this is poorly worded; Obama simply let his commanders and the men under them ''do as they saw fit,'' that the Captain lived was just a happy coincidence.

:[http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=13351436 That Abdiwali Abdiqadir Muse's sentencing hasn't taken place cannot be placed at the feet of Obama just yet.]

:I'm not sure what the "either way" is about since one of the scenarios is based upon a hypothetical.

[[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 15:31, 1 February 2011 (EST)

::Here is my source for the statement "Obama never did give the order to kill the pirates, but the US Navy finally took it upon themselves to do it and rescued the captain." [http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/unlike-the-u-s-president-south-korea-has-no-problem-wasting-eight-somali-muslim-priates/] He took credit and I gave him credit. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:08, 1 February 2011 (EST)

==References==
{{reflist}}

== Weapon sales to Egypt ==

Personally I don't think that allowing the sale of 125 M1-series tanks to Egypt shows a muslim agenda on Borat Osama's part at all. Egypt already has 1,130 M1A1s which they built themselves using a factory and production licence given to them by Ronald Reagan, who I don't think any of us are accusing of being a secret muslim, and Reagan also either sold Egypt, or approved the sale to Egypt by Austria, of over 1,000 M60-series tanks. Arming Egypt and breaking their old dependancy on Soviet equipment and advisers is a long-standing and perfectly sensible US policy. Supplying Egypt with US weapons also helped with the Camp David agreement, which has been a huge boost to Israel's security. --[[User:JMairs|JMairs]] 13:59, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
:I am reverting you. A)This isn't the Muslim agenda of Ronald Reagan B)The sale to Egypt is alarming. Once an ally, now a transitional government opposed to U.S. policies. It's one thing to arm a nation keeping the peace in the region. It's another to arm our enemies like the Muslim brotherhood. As for BO's Libyan announcement, this is his policy, this is his war. It's his agenda that he gets credit for. He calls for a peaceful transition, which is commendable. In reality, there are many deaths in this struggle. The transition has been and will be bloody. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:09, 23 August 2011 (EDT)

== So, ==

What exactly is the point of this article?--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:45, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

World War II

2011-09-28T23:52:48Z

SeanS:

{{World War 2
| image =WWII collage.JPG
| conflict =
| date =1937/9-1945
| location =Europe North and eastern Africa Eastern Asia Pacific Ocean Atlantic Ocean 
| combatant1 ='''Allies''' [[Great Britain]] [[France]] [[Soviet Union]](From 1941) [[China]] [[United States]](from 1941) [[Poland]] [[Denmark]] [[Norway]] [[Belgium]] [[Luxembourg]] [[Canada]] [[Australia]] [[New Zealand]] [[Netherlands]] [[Yugoslavia]] [[Greece]] [[Italy]](from 1943 to 1945)
| combatant2 ='''Axis''' [[Nazi Germany]] [[Italy]](until 1943) [[Japan]] [[Hungary]](1941–45) [[Romania]](1941–44) [[Bulgaria]](1941–44) [[Soviet Union]] (til 1941) 
| commander1 =
| commander2 =
| strength1 =
| strength2 =
| casualties1 =
| casualties2 =
}}
'''World War II''' was a global set of conflicts, beginning in 1931 in Asia, 1935 in Africa, and 1939 in Europe, all lasting until 1945, in which the [[Allies|Allied powers]] (led after the Fall of France by the [[British Commonwealth]], and including the [[United States]], the [[Soviet Union]], the [[Republic of China]], among many other nations), completely defeated the [[Axis Powers]] (led by [[Third Reich|Nazi Germany]], and including [[Italy]], [[Japan]], [[Hungary]], [[Romania]] and [[Bulgaria]]). Although Japan's war against China began in 1937, the main conflict started in September 1939 when Germany and the Soviet Union divided [[Poland]]; [[Britain]] and [[French Third Republic|France]] then declared war on Germany.

The conflict was the deadliest in human history with estimated deaths ranging from 50 million to over 70 million soldiers and civilians.<ref>http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Second</ref> It ended with the Soviet Union dominant in Eastern Europe, and the U.S. and its allies dominant in Western Europe, setting the stage for the [[Cold War]].
==Causes==
:''See: [[Causes of World War II]]''

==War Begins in Europe==
[[Image:Communazi Peace Pact.jpg|thumb|300px|right|By terms of a secret protocol to the [[Nazi-Soviet pact]], [[Poland]] was partitioned with Germany and the USSR each occupying 200,000 square kilometers.]]
:''See also: [[Molotov-Ribbentrop pact]]''

In the immediate run up to WWII, there were frequent reports of trespassing Polish troops. On August 31, 1939 German covert operatives staged a fake attack by Polish troops on a German radio station. WWII started on September 1, 1939, when German troops invaded Poland. Hitler justified this as a defensive act, pointing to the frequent border incidents, and said famously that from this moment on Germany would strike back.

The major tactical innovation of the war was the use of combined arms warfare, typified by the German doctrine of [[blitzkrieg]]. In this style of warfare armor, infantry, artillery and air power (see [[Luftwaffe]]) all coordinate to achieve overwhelming superiority at point on the enemy lines. Armor and fast-moving infantry units then exploit the gap and penetrate deep behind enemy lines. The objective is to cause a widespread collapse of the enemy's ability to fight. It was particularly effective during the early stages of the war, before the Allies developed effective countermeasures.
On September 17, 1939, Poland was invaded from the east by Hitler’s ally, [[Josef Stalin|Stalin]].

In 1939-1940, eastern Poland, [[Estonia]], [[Latvia]], [[Lithuania]] and [[Bessarabia]] were invaded and annexed by the Soviet Union.

==War in the West==
[[Image:Caen_sniper.jpg|left|thumb|200px|A Canadian soldier in the ruins of Caen, 9 July 1944]]
Once the invasion of Poland was complete, German forces regrouped while French and British forces remained on the defensive, leading US commentators to dub it the [[Sitskreig|Phoney War]]. May 10 1940 made clear that the war was real, as Germany invaded France, occupying neutral countries such as the [[Netherlands]], [[Luxembourg]] and [[Belgium]] in the process. Resistance by the British and French armies proved ineffective, and France was soon surrendered. British and French troops were routed and evacuated mainland Europe at [[Dunkirk]]. France was divided into the northern [[Occupied France]] and the collaborationist [[Vichy regime]] in the south of France, including [[Corsica]].

The collapse and occupation of France, together with Germany's non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union,<ref>[http://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2007/01/celebrations-marking-60-years-since-end.html Celebrations Marking 60 Years Since the End of World War II], Pavel Vitek, ''Russkii vopros - Studies'', No. 1 2005. Translation from Russian.</ref>, Germany's alliance with fascist Italy and an expansionist Japan, the benevolent neutrality of fascist Spain, and the fact that little of Europe was outside Axis control, led many to assume that Britain had been defeated. Indeed it would appear that the seemingly foolish decision of the relatively weak Britain to continue the war took the Axis powers off guard. This decision ensured the remaining British Empire was still involved in the war, with Japan threatening many British possessions in Asia.

In 1940 [[Denmark]] and [[Norway]] were invaded by German forces, to preempt a British occupation of Norway and occupy its coastline and ports to be used by the [[Kriegsmarine]]. Norway also contained a source of [[Heavy water]], potentially crucial in the construction of an atomic weapon. The operation was successful, but losses were heavy, especially to the Kriegsmarine. This was soon followed by the British troops invited by [[Iceland]] and American occupation of [[Greenland]]. (The goal was to prevent any increase in the range of German air and submarine activity, brought about the occupation of these lands - and of the Azores at the request of the Portuguese Government.)

With Britain the sole opposing European nation, the [[Battle of Britain]] commenced. The [[Luftwaffe]] attempted to achieve aerial dominance over the south of Britain, in order to allow a sea based invasion of the British Isles to proceed. From 10th July to the end of October the [[Royal Air Force]] and the Luftwaffe fought for dominance; the resilience of the RAF, which counted in its ranks also Commonwealth personnel, US volunteers and Polish and Czech exiles, and the use of [[radar]] and its associated early warning systems, had forced a rethink of German tactics. It was the first significant setback for the Germans in the War. They now concentrated on the great population centers, especially London, hoping that huge civilian casualties would weaken morale and lead to a lessening of the war effort by the populace. The period that followed, popularly known as [[the Blitz]], lasted into May 1941. Around 40,000 civilians and civil defense workers died; but the Germans failed to reach their objectives and their resources were soon diverted to the Eastern front as Hitler began concentrating on the impending invasion of the Soviet Union.

With the pressure off their airbases the RAF was now able to increase its nightly raids on industrial sites in Germany and occupied lands. Because of the inability to correctly target these sites, the raids soon turned into “area bombing”, and German civilian casualties rose. These raids were to reach further into Germany as the war progressed and were greatly increased when American bombers began their sorties.

==Finnish Wars==

The Soviet Union invaded [[Finland]], a neutral, on November 30 1939. This conflict came to be known as the "Winter War". Despite the overwhelming numbers of the Red Army, the Finnish resistance was strong and the battle was hard fought before the Soviet army took control. Outside powers (including the U.S.) considered intervention to help Finland; only a little aid trickled in and Finland was forced to sue for peace. The peace treaty signed in March 1940 favored the Soviets, but they paid heavily for their victory with 200,000 dead. Finland lost 25,000 dead, and had to absorb 400,000 refugees from areas turned over to the Soviets. In 1941 Finland joined Germany in attacking the Soviets, in the "Continuation War" (1941-44), but lost again. An armistice in Sept. 1944 stabilized the border, using March 1940 lines; in addition Finland had to pay heavy reparations and had to remain neutral in the [[Cold War]].<ref> Roger R. Reese, "Lessons of the Winter War: a Study in the Military Effectiveness of the Red Army, 1939-1940," ''Journal of Military History'' 2008 72(3): 825-852 </ref>

==Soviet-German War==
1941 marked the major turning point in the war in Europe, when the Germans undertook [[Operation Barbarossa]] - the invasion of the Soviet Union. Stalin was repeatedly informed by his own spies and anti-German countries that Germany was about to attack; he rejected the accurate reports and paid dearly for the blunder.

In June--behind schedule because of diversions in the Balkans--the Germans launched their massive war against the Soviet Union (known as the "Great Patriotic War" in Russia). It was by far the largest, bloodiest, and most decisive phase of World War II. Outside observers in the first few months figured that Germany would win easily. But the Nazi armies were split three ways, logistics became worse and worse as distances grew, and none met their objective by the time the extreme Russian winter of 1941-42 set in. Blitzkrieg had failed against the Soviets, and the Germans lacked the resources to fight a long war against a country with such vast areas and so many more people. The Luftwaffe, which promised to overcome the slowness of ground travel, failed to provide adequate support and was soon matched and outnumbered by the Soviet air force.<ref> The best studies of this theater are by [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=30&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES&lr=&as_vt=&as_auth=glantz+david&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_isbn=&as_issn= David Glantz]</ref>

Finally, after the disastrous Battle of Stalingrad, in which nearly 25% of the German forces on the Eastern Front were defeated, the Soviets began a massive, steady counter-attack. After a time of comparatively slow progress, the brilliant Soviet officer, Konstantin Rokossovsky, engineered "Operation Bagration", named-so after the Napoleonic Russian hero. The operation was extremely successful for the Soviets, leading to around 600,000 Soviet casualties and over 500,000 German casualties, including over 60,000 German vehicles and tanks. Even the Germans' best officer, Erich von Manstein, couldn't turn the situation around. Finally, in 1945, Soviet troops stormed Berlin, and forced Nazi Germany into capitulation.

==Far East==

After Pearl Harbor, the Japanese juggernaut seemed unstoppable. In the south, they conquered the [[Philippines]], the oil-rich Dutch East Indies, Malaysia, and extended their reach as far as the Solomon Islands. In the west, they seized [[Burma]] and the vital port at [[Rangoon]], and even attacked British forces at [[Ceylon]]. The Japanese empire now reached as far as [[Wake Island]] in the east and the [[Aleutian Islands]] to the north. Attacks on Japanese targets, including the Doolittle raid, boasted American morale, but did little material damage. In May 1942, Japanese forces were finally halted at the [[Battle of the Coral Sea]], which cost the Americans a precious [[aircraft carrier]], but saved southern [[New Guinea]]. At the [[Battle of Midway]] a month later, the Japanese lost four of their best carriers, suffering a blow to their sea power from which they never recovered.

The Americans took the offensive in August with a landing on the island of [[Guadalcanal]]. The overall American offensive strategy was two-pronged. Forces in the south advanced up the Solomon island chain and New Guinea, while in the central Pacific, Marines took island after island, including [[Battle of Tarawa|Tarawa]], Eniwetok, [[Saipan]], and [[Guam]]. The two lines of attack came together at the Philippines.

Integral to the strategy was the policy of island hopping. Many Japanese strongholds were bypassed, allowing the American forces to concentrate on more strategically significant islands. For example, [[Truk]] and Rabaul were home to major Japanese air and naval bases, but once the bases were neutralized, there was no reason to take on the troops there. This policy not only saved thousands of American (and Japanese) lives, it shortened the war by at least several months.

The American invasion of the Philippines took place in late October of 1944 when Marines landed on Leyte Island. A few days later, the US Navy shattered what was left of Japanese naval power in the [[Battle of Leyte Gulf]]. The Japanese fought hard, however, and Leyte took two months to secure. When the Americans landed on the other islands, they found the troops there equally unwilling to retreat, but with American superiority in almost every area, the outcome was never really in doubt. [[Manila]] was captured by March, and the American position had become solid enough that leaders could start preparing for the final stage: [[Operation Downfall|the invasion of Japan]]. The first step was taken when the island of [[Okinawa]] was captured in June after two months of heavy fighting. Operation Olympic, the invasion of [[Kyushu]], was scheduled for November 1945, followed by Operation Coronet, the invasion of [[Honshu]], in March of 1946.

The Japanese, soldiers and civilians alike, were expected to put up a fierce defense. Army Chief of Staff [[George C. Marshall]] believed that Japan would fight to the last man, and insisted on preparing for a land invasion of Japan with an army of 2,000,000 men anticipating a tremendous number of casualties. Some analysts estimated the number of projected casualties from Operation Olympic alone at 250,000 dead and wounded.<ref>Historical Atlas of the U.S. Navy, by Craig L. Symonds, the Naval Institute, 1995</ref> For this reason, Washington begged the Soviet to invade Japanese possessions on the mainland.

[[Image:Ww2-asia usma.edu pic.gif|thumb|300px|left|Time Line of Pacific War]]

==Japanese capitulation==
On August 6, 1945, a B-29 Superfortress, the Enola Gay piloted by Paul Tibbet, dropped an atomic bomb (now called a nuclear weapon) on [[Hiroshima]]. Japan did not respond, so on August 9, Bocks Car, a B-29 piloted by Frederick C. Bock dropped the second atomic bomb.

The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945, in reponse to urgent American requests. It invaded Manchuria and Korea; the Japanese army disintegrated. It was no longer possible for the Imprial Army to defend the Emperor. On August 20 the Japanese government told Washington it was ready to accept the proposed terms, with the understanding the Emperor would remain on the throne and would not be hung as a war criminal. Washington agreed, saying the authority of the emperor would be "subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers." On September 2, 1945, the Japanese Emperor formally surrendered all Japanese forces to the Allies in a famous ceremony aboard the battleship ''USS Missouri'' in Tokyo Bay. This was the ending of World War II, after six years almost to the day.

==Effects of war on empires==

*[[Iron Curtain]]
:The Red army conquered practically everything east of the "Iron Curtain," destroying independent national governments and making them all subservient to Moscow. The US grudgingly tolerated this imperialism until 1947, when it was Greece's turn. Then the US drew the line and adopted a policy of [[containment]]. Because of the geography of war, [[Yugoslavia]] and [[Albania]] escaped the Red Army. They fell under the control of independent Communists--Yugoslavia received American support, and Albania turned to Red China for help against the Soviets.

*[[British Empire]]
:The war effectively bankrupted Britain, which soon gave up India (which then included Pakistan and Ceylon) and many of its other colonies).

* French Empire
:France saluted its overseas Empire as the savior of France, and wanted control back. That led to nasty large scale wars in Algeria and Vietnam, which France lost.

*the Netherlands and Indonesia
:The Dutch returned to the [[Dutch East Indies]] to face an insurrection they could not handle. Dutch acknowledged in 1949 the sovereignty of [[Indonesia]], a non-Communist state.

*Supremacy of the USA in the Western World
:The war left the U.S. with a vastly stronger economy than anyone else. To save on budget deficits the military was demobilized, but the long-term strategy was in confusion after Roosevelt's death.

==See also==
===Land war===
[[Image:Bradley.jpg|thumb|290px|''Time'' Dec. 4, 1944]]
* [[Battle of the Bulge]], Dec. 1944
* [[Battle of Okinawa]], spring 1945
* [[Second Sino-Japanese War]], 1937-45
* [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]], US general
* [[Omar Bradley]], US general
* [[George S. Patton, Jr.]], US general
===Air war===
* [[Luftwaffe]], German air force
* [[World War II in the Air]]
* [[Bombing of Japan]]
* [[Bombing of Germany]]
===Naval===
* [[Attack on Pearl Harbor]], Dec. 1941
* [[Battle of Midway]], June 1942
* [[Chester W. Nimitz]], US Admiral

===Homefronts===
* [[Holocaust]], killing the Jews

===Leaders===
* [[Charles de Gaulle]], France
* [[Adolf Hitler]], Germany
* [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], US
* [[Winston Churchill]], Britain
* [[Joseph Stalin]], Russia
* [[Chiang Kai-shek]], China
* [[Benito Mussolini]], Italy
* [[William Lyon Mackenzie King]], Canada
* [[John Curtin]], Australia

==Further reading==
For a more detailed guide, see [[Bibliography of World War II]]

* Dear, I. C. B. and M. R. D. Foot, eds. ''Oxford Companion to World War II'' (in Britain titled ''Oxford Companion to the Second World War'' (2005; 2nd ed. 2009). the best reference book; [http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Companion-World-War-II/dp/019280670X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236549909&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* ''Times Atlas of the Second World War'' (1995)
* Weinberg, Gerhard L. ''A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II'', (1994) the best overall view of the war.

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

== External Links ==
* United States Department of the Navy/Navy Historical Center's [http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq36-4.htm Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz]
* [http://www.onpower.org/history_wwii.html/ World War II]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=12&articleID=139 "On the Brink of World War II: Justus Doenecke’s ''Storm on the Horizon''," by Ralph Raico]
*[http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~epf/1997/padilla.html Kursk: The Turning Point on the Eastern Front in World War II], by Roberto R. Padilla II
* [http://encyc.org/WorldWarII World War II - Encyc]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/working_papers/article.asp?id=1499 "Government and the Economy: The World Wars," by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=113 "How War Amplified Federal Power in the Twentieth Century," by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=65 ''Depression, War and Cold War'', by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=138 "Wartime Prosperity?", by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/issues/article.asp?id=1431 Pearl Harbor]
[[Category:World War II| ]]
[[Category:Wars]]

World War II

2011-09-28T23:51:37Z

SeanS: 1931...? Also changing some other stuff

{{World War 2
| image =WWII collage.JPG
| conflict =
| date =1937/9-1945
| location =Europe North and eastern Africa Eastern Asia
| combatant1 ='''Allies''' [[Great Britain]] [[France]] [[Soviet Union]](From 1941) [[China]] [[United States]](from 1941) [[Poland]] [[Denmark]] [[Norway]] [[Belgium]] [[Luxembourg]] [[Canada]] [[Australia]] [[New Zealand]] [[Netherlands]] [[Yugoslavia]] [[Greece]] [[Italy]](from 1943 to 1945)
| combatant2 ='''Axis''' [[Nazi Germany]] [[Italy]](until 1943) [[Japan]] [[Hungary]](1941–45) [[Romania]](1941–44) [[Bulgaria]](1941–44) [[Soviet Union]] (til 1941) 
| commander1 =
| commander2 =
| strength1 =
| strength2 =
| casualties1 =
| casualties2 =
}}
'''World War II''' was a global set of conflicts, beginning in 1931 in Asia, 1935 in Africa, and 1939 in Europe, all lasting until 1945, in which the [[Allies|Allied powers]] (led after the Fall of France by the [[British Commonwealth]], and including the [[United States]], the [[Soviet Union]], the [[Republic of China]], among many other nations), completely defeated the [[Axis Powers]] (led by [[Third Reich|Nazi Germany]], and including [[Italy]], [[Japan]], [[Hungary]], [[Romania]] and [[Bulgaria]]). Although Japan's war against China began in 1937, the main conflict started in September 1939 when Germany and the Soviet Union divided [[Poland]]; [[Britain]] and [[French Third Republic|France]] then declared war on Germany.

The conflict was the deadliest in human history with estimated deaths ranging from 50 million to over 70 million soldiers and civilians.<ref>http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Second</ref> It ended with the Soviet Union dominant in Eastern Europe, and the U.S. and its allies dominant in Western Europe, setting the stage for the [[Cold War]].
==Causes==
:''See: [[Causes of World War II]]''

==War Begins in Europe==
[[Image:Communazi Peace Pact.jpg|thumb|300px|right|By terms of a secret protocol to the [[Nazi-Soviet pact]], [[Poland]] was partitioned with Germany and the USSR each occupying 200,000 square kilometers.]]
:''See also: [[Molotov-Ribbentrop pact]]''

In the immediate run up to WWII, there were frequent reports of trespassing Polish troops. On August 31, 1939 German covert operatives staged a fake attack by Polish troops on a German radio station. WWII started on September 1, 1939, when German troops invaded Poland. Hitler justified this as a defensive act, pointing to the frequent border incidents, and said famously that from this moment on Germany would strike back.

The major tactical innovation of the war was the use of combined arms warfare, typified by the German doctrine of [[blitzkrieg]]. In this style of warfare armor, infantry, artillery and air power (see [[Luftwaffe]]) all coordinate to achieve overwhelming superiority at point on the enemy lines. Armor and fast-moving infantry units then exploit the gap and penetrate deep behind enemy lines. The objective is to cause a widespread collapse of the enemy's ability to fight. It was particularly effective during the early stages of the war, before the Allies developed effective countermeasures.
On September 17, 1939, Poland was invaded from the east by Hitler’s ally, [[Josef Stalin|Stalin]].

In 1939-1940, eastern Poland, [[Estonia]], [[Latvia]], [[Lithuania]] and [[Bessarabia]] were invaded and annexed by the Soviet Union.

==War in the West==
[[Image:Caen_sniper.jpg|left|thumb|200px|A Canadian soldier in the ruins of Caen, 9 July 1944]]
Once the invasion of Poland was complete, German forces regrouped while French and British forces remained on the defensive, leading US commentators to dub it the [[Sitskreig|Phoney War]]. May 10 1940 made clear that the war was real, as Germany invaded France, occupying neutral countries such as the [[Netherlands]], [[Luxembourg]] and [[Belgium]] in the process. Resistance by the British and French armies proved ineffective, and France was soon surrendered. British and French troops were routed and evacuated mainland Europe at [[Dunkirk]]. France was divided into the northern [[Occupied France]] and the collaborationist [[Vichy regime]] in the south of France, including [[Corsica]].

The collapse and occupation of France, together with Germany's non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union,<ref>[http://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2007/01/celebrations-marking-60-years-since-end.html Celebrations Marking 60 Years Since the End of World War II], Pavel Vitek, ''Russkii vopros - Studies'', No. 1 2005. Translation from Russian.</ref>, Germany's alliance with fascist Italy and an expansionist Japan, the benevolent neutrality of fascist Spain, and the fact that little of Europe was outside Axis control, led many to assume that Britain had been defeated. Indeed it would appear that the seemingly foolish decision of the relatively weak Britain to continue the war took the Axis powers off guard. This decision ensured the remaining British Empire was still involved in the war, with Japan threatening many British possessions in Asia.

In 1940 [[Denmark]] and [[Norway]] were invaded by German forces, to preempt a British occupation of Norway and occupy its coastline and ports to be used by the [[Kriegsmarine]]. Norway also contained a source of [[Heavy water]], potentially crucial in the construction of an atomic weapon. The operation was successful, but losses were heavy, especially to the Kriegsmarine. This was soon followed by the British troops invited by [[Iceland]] and American occupation of [[Greenland]]. (The goal was to prevent any increase in the range of German air and submarine activity, brought about the occupation of these lands - and of the Azores at the request of the Portuguese Government.)

With Britain the sole opposing European nation, the [[Battle of Britain]] commenced. The [[Luftwaffe]] attempted to achieve aerial dominance over the south of Britain, in order to allow a sea based invasion of the British Isles to proceed. From 10th July to the end of October the [[Royal Air Force]] and the Luftwaffe fought for dominance; the resilience of the RAF, which counted in its ranks also Commonwealth personnel, US volunteers and Polish and Czech exiles, and the use of [[radar]] and its associated early warning systems, had forced a rethink of German tactics. It was the first significant setback for the Germans in the War. They now concentrated on the great population centers, especially London, hoping that huge civilian casualties would weaken morale and lead to a lessening of the war effort by the populace. The period that followed, popularly known as [[the Blitz]], lasted into May 1941. Around 40,000 civilians and civil defense workers died; but the Germans failed to reach their objectives and their resources were soon diverted to the Eastern front as Hitler began concentrating on the impending invasion of the Soviet Union.

With the pressure off their airbases the RAF was now able to increase its nightly raids on industrial sites in Germany and occupied lands. Because of the inability to correctly target these sites, the raids soon turned into “area bombing”, and German civilian casualties rose. These raids were to reach further into Germany as the war progressed and were greatly increased when American bombers began their sorties.

==Finnish Wars==

The Soviet Union invaded [[Finland]], a neutral, on November 30 1939. This conflict came to be known as the "Winter War". Despite the overwhelming numbers of the Red Army, the Finnish resistance was strong and the battle was hard fought before the Soviet army took control. Outside powers (including the U.S.) considered intervention to help Finland; only a little aid trickled in and Finland was forced to sue for peace. The peace treaty signed in March 1940 favored the Soviets, but they paid heavily for their victory with 200,000 dead. Finland lost 25,000 dead, and had to absorb 400,000 refugees from areas turned over to the Soviets. In 1941 Finland joined Germany in attacking the Soviets, in the "Continuation War" (1941-44), but lost again. An armistice in Sept. 1944 stabilized the border, using March 1940 lines; in addition Finland had to pay heavy reparations and had to remain neutral in the [[Cold War]].<ref> Roger R. Reese, "Lessons of the Winter War: a Study in the Military Effectiveness of the Red Army, 1939-1940," ''Journal of Military History'' 2008 72(3): 825-852 </ref>

==Soviet-German War==
1941 marked the major turning point in the war in Europe, when the Germans undertook [[Operation Barbarossa]] - the invasion of the Soviet Union. Stalin was repeatedly informed by his own spies and anti-German countries that Germany was about to attack; he rejected the accurate reports and paid dearly for the blunder.

In June--behind schedule because of diversions in the Balkans--the Germans launched their massive war against the Soviet Union (known as the "Great Patriotic War" in Russia). It was by far the largest, bloodiest, and most decisive phase of World War II. Outside observers in the first few months figured that Germany would win easily. But the Nazi armies were split three ways, logistics became worse and worse as distances grew, and none met their objective by the time the extreme Russian winter of 1941-42 set in. Blitzkrieg had failed against the Soviets, and the Germans lacked the resources to fight a long war against a country with such vast areas and so many more people. The Luftwaffe, which promised to overcome the slowness of ground travel, failed to provide adequate support and was soon matched and outnumbered by the Soviet air force.<ref> The best studies of this theater are by [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=30&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES&lr=&as_vt=&as_auth=glantz+david&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_isbn=&as_issn= David Glantz]</ref>

Finally, after the disastrous Battle of Stalingrad, in which nearly 25% of the German forces on the Eastern Front were defeated, the Soviets began a massive, steady counter-attack. After a time of comparatively slow progress, the brilliant Soviet officer, Konstantin Rokossovsky, engineered "Operation Bagration", named-so after the Napoleonic Russian hero. The operation was extremely successful for the Soviets, leading to around 600,000 Soviet casualties and over 500,000 German casualties, including over 60,000 German vehicles and tanks. Even the Germans' best officer, Erich von Manstein, couldn't turn the situation around. Finally, in 1945, Soviet troops stormed Berlin, and forced Nazi Germany into capitulation.

==Far East==

After Pearl Harbor, the Japanese juggernaut seemed unstoppable. In the south, they conquered the [[Philippines]], the oil-rich Dutch East Indies, Malaysia, and extended their reach as far as the Solomon Islands. In the west, they seized [[Burma]] and the vital port at [[Rangoon]], and even attacked British forces at [[Ceylon]]. The Japanese empire now reached as far as [[Wake Island]] in the east and the [[Aleutian Islands]] to the north. Attacks on Japanese targets, including the Doolittle raid, boasted American morale, but did little material damage. In May 1942, Japanese forces were finally halted at the [[Battle of the Coral Sea]], which cost the Americans a precious [[aircraft carrier]], but saved southern [[New Guinea]]. At the [[Battle of Midway]] a month later, the Japanese lost four of their best carriers, suffering a blow to their sea power from which they never recovered.

The Americans took the offensive in August with a landing on the island of [[Guadalcanal]]. The overall American offensive strategy was two-pronged. Forces in the south advanced up the Solomon island chain and New Guinea, while in the central Pacific, Marines took island after island, including [[Battle of Tarawa|Tarawa]], Eniwetok, [[Saipan]], and [[Guam]]. The two lines of attack came together at the Philippines.

Integral to the strategy was the policy of island hopping. Many Japanese strongholds were bypassed, allowing the American forces to concentrate on more strategically significant islands. For example, [[Truk]] and Rabaul were home to major Japanese air and naval bases, but once the bases were neutralized, there was no reason to take on the troops there. This policy not only saved thousands of American (and Japanese) lives, it shortened the war by at least several months.

The American invasion of the Philippines took place in late October of 1944 when Marines landed on Leyte Island. A few days later, the US Navy shattered what was left of Japanese naval power in the [[Battle of Leyte Gulf]]. The Japanese fought hard, however, and Leyte took two months to secure. When the Americans landed on the other islands, they found the troops there equally unwilling to retreat, but with American superiority in almost every area, the outcome was never really in doubt. [[Manila]] was captured by March, and the American position had become solid enough that leaders could start preparing for the final stage: [[Operation Downfall|the invasion of Japan]]. The first step was taken when the island of [[Okinawa]] was captured in June after two months of heavy fighting. Operation Olympic, the invasion of [[Kyushu]], was scheduled for November 1945, followed by Operation Coronet, the invasion of [[Honshu]], in March of 1946.

The Japanese, soldiers and civilians alike, were expected to put up a fierce defense. Army Chief of Staff [[George C. Marshall]] believed that Japan would fight to the last man, and insisted on preparing for a land invasion of Japan with an army of 2,000,000 men anticipating a tremendous number of casualties. Some analysts estimated the number of projected casualties from Operation Olympic alone at 250,000 dead and wounded.<ref>Historical Atlas of the U.S. Navy, by Craig L. Symonds, the Naval Institute, 1995</ref> For this reason, Washington begged the Soviet to invade Japanese possessions on the mainland.

[[Image:Ww2-asia usma.edu pic.gif|thumb|300px|left|Time Line of Pacific War]]

==Japanese capitulation==
On August 6, 1945, a B-29 Superfortress, the Enola Gay piloted by Paul Tibbet, dropped an atomic bomb (now called a nuclear weapon) on [[Hiroshima]]. Japan did not respond, so on August 9, Bocks Car, a B-29 piloted by Frederick C. Bock dropped the second atomic bomb.

The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945, in reponse to urgent American requests. It invaded Manchuria and Korea; the Japanese army disintegrated. It was no longer possible for the Imprial Army to defend the Emperor. On August 20 the Japanese government told Washington it was ready to accept the proposed terms, with the understanding the Emperor would remain on the throne and would not be hung as a war criminal. Washington agreed, saying the authority of the emperor would be "subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers." On September 2, 1945, the Japanese Emperor formally surrendered all Japanese forces to the Allies in a famous ceremony aboard the battleship ''USS Missouri'' in Tokyo Bay. This was the ending of World War II, after six years almost to the day.

==Effects of war on empires==

*[[Iron Curtain]]
:The Red army conquered practically everything east of the "Iron Curtain," destroying independent national governments and making them all subservient to Moscow. The US grudgingly tolerated this imperialism until 1947, when it was Greece's turn. Then the US drew the line and adopted a policy of [[containment]]. Because of the geography of war, [[Yugoslavia]] and [[Albania]] escaped the Red Army. They fell under the control of independent Communists--Yugoslavia received American support, and Albania turned to Red China for help against the Soviets.

*[[British Empire]]
:The war effectively bankrupted Britain, which soon gave up India (which then included Pakistan and Ceylon) and many of its other colonies).

* French Empire
:France saluted its overseas Empire as the savior of France, and wanted control back. That led to nasty large scale wars in Algeria and Vietnam, which France lost.

*the Netherlands and Indonesia
:The Dutch returned to the [[Dutch East Indies]] to face an insurrection they could not handle. Dutch acknowledged in 1949 the sovereignty of [[Indonesia]], a non-Communist state.

*Supremacy of the USA in the Western World
:The war left the U.S. with a vastly stronger economy than anyone else. To save on budget deficits the military was demobilized, but the long-term strategy was in confusion after Roosevelt's death.

==See also==
===Land war===
[[Image:Bradley.jpg|thumb|290px|''Time'' Dec. 4, 1944]]
* [[Battle of the Bulge]], Dec. 1944
* [[Battle of Okinawa]], spring 1945
* [[Second Sino-Japanese War]], 1937-45
* [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]], US general
* [[Omar Bradley]], US general
* [[George S. Patton, Jr.]], US general
===Air war===
* [[Luftwaffe]], German air force
* [[World War II in the Air]]
* [[Bombing of Japan]]
* [[Bombing of Germany]]
===Naval===
* [[Attack on Pearl Harbor]], Dec. 1941
* [[Battle of Midway]], June 1942
* [[Chester W. Nimitz]], US Admiral

===Homefronts===
* [[Holocaust]], killing the Jews

===Leaders===
* [[Charles de Gaulle]], France
* [[Adolf Hitler]], Germany
* [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], US
* [[Winston Churchill]], Britain
* [[Joseph Stalin]], Russia
* [[Chiang Kai-shek]], China
* [[Benito Mussolini]], Italy
* [[William Lyon Mackenzie King]], Canada
* [[John Curtin]], Australia

==Further reading==
For a more detailed guide, see [[Bibliography of World War II]]

* Dear, I. C. B. and M. R. D. Foot, eds. ''Oxford Companion to World War II'' (in Britain titled ''Oxford Companion to the Second World War'' (2005; 2nd ed. 2009). the best reference book; [http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Companion-World-War-II/dp/019280670X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236549909&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* ''Times Atlas of the Second World War'' (1995)
* Weinberg, Gerhard L. ''A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II'', (1994) the best overall view of the war.

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

== External Links ==
* United States Department of the Navy/Navy Historical Center's [http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq36-4.htm Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz]
* [http://www.onpower.org/history_wwii.html/ World War II]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=12&articleID=139 "On the Brink of World War II: Justus Doenecke’s ''Storm on the Horizon''," by Ralph Raico]
*[http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~epf/1997/padilla.html Kursk: The Turning Point on the Eastern Front in World War II], by Roberto R. Padilla II
* [http://encyc.org/WorldWarII World War II - Encyc]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/working_papers/article.asp?id=1499 "Government and the Economy: The World Wars," by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=113 "How War Amplified Federal Power in the Twentieth Century," by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=65 ''Depression, War and Cold War'', by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=138 "Wartime Prosperity?", by Robert Higgs]
* [http://www.independent.org/issues/article.asp?id=1431 Pearl Harbor]
[[Category:World War II| ]]
[[Category:Wars]]

User talk:AverageJoe

2011-09-28T22:13:03Z

SeanS: /* and now */

== and now ==

I'm going to ask you to be civil, Even if you don't like what Conservative does insulting him isn't going to get us anywhere. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:What IS going to get us somewhere? Half the internet is laughing at us because of those bestiality articles, and all that Aschlafly does is quietly drop his talk page down the memory hole while everyone is looking somewhere else. If nobody is going to take a stand against this explosion of obscenity, what does that say about us? We can't even try to correct the articles because they're all protected. --[[User:ThomasMacD|ThomasMacD]] 18:07, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::Being uncivil isn't going to help your side though. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:09, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Only admins are allowed to be uncivil! I knew that. So sorry. [[User:AverageJoe|AverageJoe]] 18:11, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::That isn't going to help much either.--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:13, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

User talk:SeanS

2011-09-28T22:12:15Z

SeanS:

User talk:AverageJoe

2011-09-28T22:09:28Z

SeanS: /* and now */

Talk:Bestiality and Britain

2011-09-28T22:04:36Z

SeanS: Undo revision 922699 by AverageJoe (talk) removing uncivil remark

==Pro Tip==
It's often a good idea for the content of an article to actually match the title. For example, this article is entitled ''Bestiality and Britain'' (which I gather is the beginning of an exciting new series on bestiality by geographic location). Yet the content (at the time this was written) consists largely of two block quotes. The first addressing religiosity in Britain. The second dealing with bestiality in Sweden (which is not part of the UK). You see the problem here? You never actually address the issue of Bestiality in Great Britain. Other than that, it's up to CP's usual high editing standards. --[[User:SteveK|SteveK]] 02:06, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
::::It is a Swedish news organization reporting on a British study. I suggest taking a reading comprehension course. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:08, 28 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Yes, a British study of what? Bestiality in Sweden, the UK, American Samoa? Your source doesn't say. Who conducted the study? What was the methodology? So I guess you consider some random Swedish news site, quoting an unnamed study, as a reliable source. If that's an acceptable sourcing standard for CP, I can think of a ton of improvements I can make around here. ;-) --[[User:SteveK|SteveK]] 17:47, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

== some suggested improvements ==

I have taken the liberty of suggesting some improvements. How do you all like these edits:

'''Removed picture of Boteach as he has nothing to do with bestiality'''

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal.

<s>In 2011, in an article entitled ''Godless Britain'' Shmuley Boteach reported in the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'':</s>
{{cquote|<s>Britain today has become one of the most godless societies on earth. Its principle religious exports today are thinkers who despise religion. From Richard Dawkins, who has compared religion to child abuse, to my friend Christopher Hitchens, who titled his 2007 book "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything," the British have cornered the market on being anti-God, at least the Christian and Jewish varieties.

While 92% of Americans believe in God, only 35% in Britain do and 43% say they have no religion, according to Britain's National Centre for Social Research. The number of people who affiliate themselves with the Church of England was 23% of the population in 2009 from 40% in 1983. In truth though, if Britain's Christian tradition is dying out, the leaders of the faith have only themselves to blame, for perpetuating the country's highly centralized religious structure.</s>[1]}} '''(nothing whatever to do with Bestiality)'''

<s>On April 26, 2001, in an article entitled ''Swedes have more and more animal sex'' the Swedish news website Nettavision reported:</s>
{{cquote|<s>No one knows for sure how many animals that are abused, but a British study from 2001 indicates that every 20th dog or cat that receives treatment at veterinaries, the injuries are not a result of a direct accident, but the animal has been inflicted the injury as a result of a sexual assault.</s>[2]}} '''Unfortunately this has nothing to do with Britain'''

See also:

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]
*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

----
;Bible on bestiality and study on bestiality

<s>The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the [[Old Testament]] [[Pentateuch|Jewish Law]], punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).</s> '''Nothing to do with Britain'''

<s>A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."[3] The atheist population [[Atheism and suicide|has a higher suicide rate]] and [[Atheism and marriageability|lower marriage rates]] than the general population (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and marriageability]] and [[Atheism and health]]). In addition, ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men.</s>[4] 
'''Nothing to do with Britain'''
{{unsigned|DamianJohn}}

User talk:AverageJoe

2011-09-28T22:04:04Z

SeanS: and now

== and now ==

I'm going to ask you to be civil, Even if you don't like what Conservative does insulting him isn't going to get us anywhere. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 18:04, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

User talk:ThomasMacD

2011-09-28T21:03:46Z

SeanS: /* again 90/10 */ new section

{{welcome}}

[[Conservapedia]] has a 90/10 rule that says that edits should not be 90% talk and 10% contributions. Please remember this. Refer to the guidelines and [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. You may be banned if you fail to follow these rules. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 14:18, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

== again 90/10 ==

Your in violation of it. Second warning basically. --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 17:03, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Antebellum

2011-09-28T18:31:18Z

SeanS: Created page with "'''Antebellum''' Is a Latin-Originated word that means "Before War" <ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/antebellum</ref> In American History it is used to the period Between the [..."

'''Antebellum''' Is a Latin-Originated word that means "Before War" <ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/antebellum</ref>

In American History it is used to the period Between the [[Revolutionary War]] and the [[American Civil War]]

==Reference==
{{reflist|1}}

[[Category:United States History]] [[Category:American Civil War]]

Free state

2011-09-28T18:25:27Z

SeanS: changing civil war to Antebellum

In the [[Antebellum]] period, a '''free state''' was a state where [[slavery]] was outlawed.
[[Category:United States History]]
[[Category:American Civil War]]

User:SeanS

2011-09-28T17:50:23Z

SeanS: Another pointless Table

Fear my userbox filled userpage >:D

*{{User Vandalized|3}}*



<big>'''I'm in my Freshman year of college so, I won't be available in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the Day''</big>--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! '''AA'''
! '''CC'''
|-
| '''AA'''
| ''AA''
| ''AC''
|-
| '''CC'''
| ''AC''
| ''CC''
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! Red
! Blue
! Yellow
|-
| '''Red'''
| Red
| Purple
| Orange
|-
| '''Blue'''
| Purple
| Blue
| Green
|-
| '''Yellow'''
| Orange
| Green
| Yellow
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Things
! Magic
! Science
! Religion
|-
| '''Storms'''
| Spells cast by Magi
| Water Vapor, electrical discharge and whatnot,
| God, possibly disfavor
|-
| '''Nat. Disaster'''
| Spells cast by a Magi
| Various causes
| God
|-
| '''Human Disaster'''
| Black magic causing chaos and problems.
| Various, usually Humans are Evil or stupid
| God, Demon, Human Will
|}

--
=About me=

*I love Astronomy, History, Video games, geography, geology, ect

I'm versed in the scientific views of the origins and of history (I don't believe it, but i find sciences story about how history went to be VERY entertaining and interesting)

I plan to teach history of a European variety.

I love video games, especially Japanese style rpg's.

I am a biblical, conservative non denominational christian

I'm Registered as a Non-Partisan Voter

==Favorite bible Quotes==

'''Revelation 21:2-4''' - ''2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ”Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”''

'''Ezekiel 18:23''' - ''”Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?”''

=userboxes=

{{User Christian}}
{{User straightforwardbiblereading}}
{{User windows}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User Youngearth}}
{{User NoEvo}}
{{User Donuthole}}
{{User American}}
{{User Not Obama}}
{{User Protestant}}
{{User Constitution}}
{{User patriot questions authority}}
{{User no death penalty}}
{{User anti-pot}}
{{User Soccer1}}
{{User Galactic Empire}}
{{User pubschool}}
{{User sysopother}}
{{User faveband|My Chemical Romance}}
{{User guncontrol}}
{{User antigun}}
{{User free speech}}
{{User nowar}}
{{User Interest}}

Cowardice

2011-09-28T12:47:42Z

SeanS:

'''Cowardice''' is lack of resolve, fortitude, or bravery. A coward is typically seen as being intrinsically weak. Cowardice is not the same as fear, a lack of fear is not bravery it is stupidity, a coward simply does not know how to deal with their fear like a whole, complete, regular adult person. <ref>[http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/239709/am_i_a_coward_for_having_fear.html?cat=9 Am I a coward for having fear?] Associated Content, Retrieved Sept 17th 2011</ref>

Cowardice comes with a handful of characteristics which you can easily recognize with a little practice. A coward will typically show a lot of false courage, and braggadocio, but when confronted will respond first with dishonesty, and then slink away. A coward will often invent excuses for avoiding conflict, a wide open schedule will suddenly become full, an acceptable medium for communication will suddenly become unacceptable, an acceptable opponent will become untouchable for some minor reason. <ref>[http://www.ehow.com/info_8544298_signs-coward.html Signs of a coward] eHow, Retrieved Sept 17th 2011</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and cowardice]]

== References ==

<references/>

[[Category: Morality]]

Talk:Liberalism and bestiality

2011-09-28T12:46:59Z

SeanS: Undo revision 922472 by TommyR (talk)

==Wow, it's going better and better==
70 articles talking about bestiality, and 7 with bestiality in the title! 

Must be the bestiality-expert encyclopedia ! Why not rename it bestialopedia ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 19:43, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

== Fantastic Article ==

This is a great article and a wonderful addition to an amazing encyclopedia. However, there are several grammar / spelling errors in it, but I can't edit it because it is protected. I'd list the mistakes, but there are unfortunately too many to single out in the talk pages. Could it be temporarily unlocked? -20:02, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

== "All liberals are atheists" ==

I did not know this </sarcasm>. Please don't blindly follow Ann Coulter. Just because a majority appears a certain way, doesn't mean you can group them all into one conglomerate. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. [http://conservapedia.com/Template_talk:Examples_of_Liberal_Bias#Athiests.3F Aschlafly agrees that not all liberals are atheists]. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 01:23, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Atheism and bestiality

2011-09-28T12:46:39Z

SeanS:

Talk:Evolutionary belief and bestiality

2011-09-28T12:45:32Z

SeanS: Blanked the page

2011 Libyan Civil War

2011-09-28T01:51:57Z

SeanS: Redirected page to Libyan War 2011

#REDIRECT [[Libyan War 2011]]

User:SeanS

2011-09-28T00:35:57Z

SeanS: /* userboxes */

Fear my userbox filled userpage >:D

*{{User Vandalized|3}}*



<big>'''I'm in my Freshman year of college so, I won't be available in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the Day''</big>--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]]

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!
! '''AA'''
! '''CC'''
|-
| '''AA'''
| ''AA''
| ''AC''
|-
| '''CC'''
| ''AC''
| ''CC''
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Things
! Magic
! Science
! Religion
|-
| '''Storms'''
| Spells cast by Magi
| Water Vapor, electrical discharge and whatnot,
| God, possibly disfavor
|-
| '''Nat. Disaster'''
| Spells cast by a Magi
| Various causes
| God
|-
| '''Human Disaster'''
| Black magic causing chaos and problems.
| Various, usually Humans are Evil or stupid
| God, Demon, Human Will
|}

--
=About me=

*I love Astronomy, History, Video games, geography, geology, ect

I'm versed in the scientific views of the origins and of history (I don't believe it, but i find sciences story about how history went to be VERY entertaining and interesting)

I plan to teach history of a European variety.

I love video games, especially Japanese style rpg's.

I am a biblical, conservative non denominational christian

I'm Registered as a Non-Partisan Voter

==Favorite bible Quotes==

'''Revelation 21:2-4''' - ''2And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ”Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”''

'''Ezekiel 18:23''' - ''”Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?”''

=userboxes=

{{User Christian}}
{{User straightforwardbiblereading}}
{{User windows}}
{{User comp-5}}
{{User Youngearth}}
{{User NoEvo}}
{{User Donuthole}}
{{User American}}
{{User Not Obama}}
{{User Protestant}}
{{User Constitution}}
{{User patriot questions authority}}
{{User no death penalty}}
{{User anti-pot}}
{{User Soccer1}}
{{User Galactic Empire}}
{{User pubschool}}
{{User sysopother}}
{{User faveband|My Chemical Romance}}
{{User guncontrol}}
{{User antigun}}
{{User free speech}}
{{User nowar}}
{{User Interest}}