Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Colin Kaepernick

2013-01-29T03:00:53Z

ThomJ:

'''Colin Kaepernick''' unexpectedly led the ''San Francisco 49ers'' to the [[Super Bowl]] in 2013, in an example of how the [[best of the public]] is superior to the experts and experts' favorites.

Colin is also an example of an [[adoption success story]], as his birth mother had an unplanned pregnancy but decided against [[abortion]].

Colin appears to be black, but is part white. Like [[Barack Hussein Obama]].

[[category:football]]

Britannia

2013-01-20T23:34:34Z

ThomJ:

'''Britannia''' is the [[National_Personification|national personification]] of the [[United Kingdom]].

She is usually depicted as a young woman with brown hair. She wares a Corinthian helmet and white robes. During the Victorian period she began to be depicted holding Poseidon's three-pronged trident and often stood in the ocean; this represented British naval power. Beside her is a Greek shield which sports the Union Flag, and at her feet a British Lion. Today she may also be holding, in one out stretched arm, an olive branch, as on the British fifty pence piece. Older images of her depict a sword.

She inspired the the popular patriotic British song, "Rule, Britannia!", from the poem of the same name by James Thomson and set to music by Thomas Arne in 1740.

Her American counterpart is [[Lady Liberty]].

== See also ==
* '''[[John Bull]]''', a personification of [[England]] or less commonly of the [[United Kingdom]]

[[Category:United Kingdom]]

The Merry Wives of Windsor

2013-01-20T23:33:46Z

ThomJ:

:''This article refers to the play by [[William Shakespeare]]. For the [[opera]] by [[Carl Otto Nicolai]] of the same name, see [[Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor]].''

'''''The Merry Wives of Windsor''''' is a 1597 [[comedy]] by [[William Shakespeare]] featuring the fat [[knight]], Sir John [[Falstaff]]. Falstaff later returned in [[Henry V]].

== See also ==
*[[Windsor Castle]]
*[[Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor]]

==External Links==
Open Source Shakespeare - The Merry Wives of Windsor [http://www.opensourceshakespeare.org/views/plays/playmenu.php?WorkID=merrywives]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Merry Wives of Windsor, The}}

[[category:Plays of Shakespeare]]

User talk:Jpatt

2013-01-20T23:27:57Z

ThomJ: /* User:Wschact */

== 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]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Archive 2012 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2012]

==Obama's Religion==
The polls varied between 10% and 18%, so "1 in 4" is not an accurate summary. If you don't like my revision, we can go back to my first phrasing of the sentence, but I think this last one is better. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:08, 4 January 2013 (EST)

It is accurate (as nearly 20% is 1 in 5) [http://abcnews.go.com/WN/pew-poll-18-percent-americans-president-obama-muslim/story?id=11437070#.UOepB-R0P3M] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/18/AR2010081806913.html] and I oppose the insertion of rumor. We don't have his baptism records and Obama can't be trusted with what he says. It's not a rumor, it's not fact, it is an unknown assumption. Replacing a sentence somebody just added reeks of edit war incivility. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 4 January 2013 (EST)

:In addition to the polling, the [[Obama's Religion|evidence is overwhelming]] that Obama is [[Muslim]]. Given how the [[liberal media]] censor any discussion of this issue. the polling data on it is even more remarkable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:47, 4 January 2013 (EST)
::Thank you for the feedback. From an editorial viewpoint, I am trying to maintain flow. Obama's quotation uses the phrase "rumors that have been over the Internet" and "score political points". I think that he is referring to the 2007 email blasts that started this. (I personally believe that such an effort would have come from a prospective Democratic primary opponent rather than from a true conservative.) So the sentence following the quote should stick with "rumor" rather than inject "best efforts of Obama's supporters" without any predicate. As for the polling, I believe the more polling references provided in the article, the better. I am pleased that the "one in four" language was changed. However, the bottom line is that if we are going to "let the readers decide", we should drop phrases like "Starting in 2007, unidentified people revealed that he was most likely a Muslim." I believe that the article can be written in a way that leaves CP without answering the question one way or the other. This issue is not important to me, but as the public face of CP, Aschlafly could take a serious hit in his personal reputation if this page receives widespread media attention in its current form. The folks that funded the 2007 email effort did not leave fingerprints, but it would be ironic if Aschlafly picked up the smoldering gun with his bare hands just in time to be identified as the proponent of the issue. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 03:19, 6 January 2013 (EST)

:::I wouldn't concern yourself about Aschlafly's reputation. Obama's quotation is more subterfuge. Obama could have specifically put the questions about his faith to rest, just as he could have come clean on his birth certificate. He prefers mystery that surrounds his life in order to hit his critics on demand. Despite the best efforts of Obama supporters is accurate. They don't want anybody to question Obama's words on the matter. We are supposed to take his word as his bond. I don't trust liars.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:49, 6 January 2013 (EST)

== User:Wschact ==

Sorry for bothering you,
Today, I unblocked [[User:Wschact]], as I felt that the comment he made, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mystery:Why_Do_Some_Oppose_the_Likelihood_that_Obama_Is_Muslim%3F&diff=next&oldid=1027278 here], was not very bad. If you disagree, please revert back to your decision. Just wanted you to know,

[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 20:14, 5 January 2013 (EST)

ok --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:33, 5 January 2013 (EST)

Sorry to bother you again, but I hope you are aware that you added Chuck Hagel to the Obama's Religion a ''second'' time. It was already at the top of the list. Perhaps you may want to consolidate. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:33, 7 January 2013 (EST)

I am not clear as to what was the concern with [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Obama%27s_Religion&action=historysubmit&diff=1028111&oldid=1028107 this edit.] I believe the audience and the fact that he made the speech during the middle of his first term as President is important to the context. Providing a link to the full text is also helpful to the readers. I also believe that the reference to Muslim teaching against same sex marriage is important to the readers. A home schooled student should learn that a wide variety of religions teach against same sex marriage. Your wording implies that Muslims approve of same sex marriage, when there is widespread opposition. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 05:36, 8 January 2013 (EST)

:I see that you care deeply for Obama's religion. I don't know why you fear my examples so much that you have to make changes. Obama claims to be a Christian while attacking the Christian faith. You want to make it as Obama is attacking the Christian and Muslim faith. No Muslim religious people are ordered to perform same-sex marriage against their beliefs. CAIR has not made any complaints against Obama's gay policy. Muslims overwhelming voted for Obama in '12 just as they did in '08 despite his gay marriage stance. What you deem important is just another attempt to water-down my examples. Do me a favor, I don't need you to correct my work. You want to edit the other entries, go ahead. Leave my work alone. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 06:34, 8 January 2013 (EST)

::Hear, hear, JPatt! This fellow Wschact is not to be trusted--I've been watching his work.--[[User:ThomJ|ThomJ]] 18:26, 20 January 2013 (EST)

==Backdoor spending authority==
Can you unprotect [[Backdoor spending authority]]? I'm still working on it. Also, User:Wschact may have some positive contributions to it. He seems knowledge on a few difficult and complicated (parliamentary and budget) processes. [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 21:09, 10 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:Jpatt

2013-01-20T23:27:40Z

ThomJ: /* Obama's Religion */

== 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]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Archive 2012 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2012]

==Obama's Religion==
The polls varied between 10% and 18%, so "1 in 4" is not an accurate summary. If you don't like my revision, we can go back to my first phrasing of the sentence, but I think this last one is better. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:08, 4 January 2013 (EST)

It is accurate (as nearly 20% is 1 in 5) [http://abcnews.go.com/WN/pew-poll-18-percent-americans-president-obama-muslim/story?id=11437070#.UOepB-R0P3M] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/18/AR2010081806913.html] and I oppose the insertion of rumor. We don't have his baptism records and Obama can't be trusted with what he says. It's not a rumor, it's not fact, it is an unknown assumption. Replacing a sentence somebody just added reeks of edit war incivility. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 4 January 2013 (EST)

:In addition to the polling, the [[Obama's Religion|evidence is overwhelming]] that Obama is [[Muslim]]. Given how the [[liberal media]] censor any discussion of this issue. the polling data on it is even more remarkable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:47, 4 January 2013 (EST)
::Thank you for the feedback. From an editorial viewpoint, I am trying to maintain flow. Obama's quotation uses the phrase "rumors that have been over the Internet" and "score political points". I think that he is referring to the 2007 email blasts that started this. (I personally believe that such an effort would have come from a prospective Democratic primary opponent rather than from a true conservative.) So the sentence following the quote should stick with "rumor" rather than inject "best efforts of Obama's supporters" without any predicate. As for the polling, I believe the more polling references provided in the article, the better. I am pleased that the "one in four" language was changed. However, the bottom line is that if we are going to "let the readers decide", we should drop phrases like "Starting in 2007, unidentified people revealed that he was most likely a Muslim." I believe that the article can be written in a way that leaves CP without answering the question one way or the other. This issue is not important to me, but as the public face of CP, Aschlafly could take a serious hit in his personal reputation if this page receives widespread media attention in its current form. The folks that funded the 2007 email effort did not leave fingerprints, but it would be ironic if Aschlafly picked up the smoldering gun with his bare hands just in time to be identified as the proponent of the issue. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 03:19, 6 January 2013 (EST)

:::I wouldn't concern yourself about Aschlafly's reputation. Obama's quotation is more subterfuge. Obama could have specifically put the questions about his faith to rest, just as he could have come clean on his birth certificate. He prefers mystery that surrounds his life in order to hit his critics on demand. Despite the best efforts of Obama supporters is accurate. They don't want anybody to question Obama's words on the matter. We are supposed to take his word as his bond. I don't trust liars.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:49, 6 January 2013 (EST)

== User:Wschact ==

Sorry for bothering you,
Today, I unblocked [[User:Wschact]], as I felt that the comment he made, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mystery:Why_Do_Some_Oppose_the_Likelihood_that_Obama_Is_Muslim%3F&diff=next&oldid=1027278 here], was not very bad. If you disagree, please revert back to your decision. Just wanted you to know,

[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 20:14, 5 January 2013 (EST)

ok --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:33, 5 January 2013 (EST)

Sorry to bother you again, but I hope you are aware that you added Chuck Hagel to the Obama's Religion a ''second'' time. It was already at the top of the list. Perhaps you may want to consolidate. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:33, 7 January 2013 (EST)

I am not clear as to what was the concern with [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Obama%27s_Religion&action=historysubmit&diff=1028111&oldid=1028107 this edit.] I believe the audience and the fact that he made the speech during the middle of his first term as President is important to the context. Providing a link to the full text is also helpful to the readers. I also believe that the reference to Muslim teaching against same sex marriage is important to the readers. A home schooled student should learn that a wide variety of religions teach against same sex marriage. Your wording implies that Muslims approve of same sex marriage, when there is widespread opposition. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 05:36, 8 January 2013 (EST)

:I see that you care deeply for Obama's religion. I don't know why you fear my examples so much that you have to make changes. Obama claims to be a Christian while attacking the Christian faith. You want to make it as Obama is attacking the Christian and Muslim faith. No Muslim religious people are ordered to perform same-sex marriage against their beliefs. CAIR has not made any complaints against Obama's gay policy. Muslims overwhelming voted for Obama in '12 just as they did in '08 despite his gay marriage stance. What you deem important is just another attempt to water-down my examples. Do me a favor, I don't need you to correct my work. You want to edit the other entries, go ahead. Leave my work alone. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 06:34, 8 January 2013 (EST)

==Backdoor spending authority==
Can you unprotect [[Backdoor spending authority]]? I'm still working on it. Also, User:Wschact may have some positive contributions to it. He seems knowledge on a few difficult and complicated (parliamentary and budget) processes. [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 21:09, 10 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:Jpatt

2013-01-20T23:27:11Z

ThomJ: /* Obama's Religion */

== 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]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Archive 2012 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2012]

==Obama's Religion==
The polls varied between 10% and 18%, so "1 in 4" is not an accurate summary. If you don't like my revision, we can go back to my first phrasing of the sentence, but I think this last one is better. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:08, 4 January 2013 (EST)

It is accurate (as nearly 20% is 1 in 5) [http://abcnews.go.com/WN/pew-poll-18-percent-americans-president-obama-muslim/story?id=11437070#.UOepB-R0P3M] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/18/AR2010081806913.html] and I oppose the insertion of rumor. We don't have his baptism records and Obama can't be trusted with what he says. It's not a rumor, it's not fact, it is an unknown assumption. Replacing a sentence somebody just added reeks of edit war incivility. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 4 January 2013 (EST)

:In addition to the polling, the [[Obama's Religion|evidence is overwhelming]] that Obama is [[Muslim]]. Given how the [[liberal media]] censor any discussion of this issue. the polling data on it is even more remarkable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:47, 4 January 2013 (EST)
::Thank you for the feedback. From an editorial viewpoint, I am trying to maintain flow. Obama's quotation uses the phrase "rumors that have been over the Internet" and "score political points". I think that he is referring to the 2007 email blasts that started this. (I personally believe that such an effort would have come from a prospective Democratic primary opponent rather than from a true conservative.) So the sentence following the quote should stick with "rumor" rather than inject "best efforts of Obama's supporters" without any predicate. As for the polling, I believe the more polling references provided in the article, the better. I am pleased that the "one in four" language was changed. However, the bottom line is that if we are going to "let the readers decide", we should drop phrases like "Starting in 2007, unidentified people revealed that he was most likely a Muslim." I believe that the article can be written in a way that leaves CP without answering the question one way or the other. This issue is not important to me, but as the public face of CP, Aschlafly could take a serious hit in his personal reputation if this page receives widespread media attention in its current form. The folks that funded the 2007 email effort did not leave fingerprints, but it would be ironic if Aschlafly picked up the smoldering gun with his bare hands just in time to be identified as the proponent of the issue. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 03:19, 6 January 2013 (EST)

:::I wouldn't concern yourself about Aschlafly's reputation. Obama's quotation is more subterfuge. Obama could have specifically put the questions about his faith to rest, just as he could have come clean on his birth certificate. He prefers mystery that surrounds his life in order to hit his critics on demand. Despite the best efforts of Obama supporters is accurate. They don't want anybody to question Obama's words on the matter. We are supposed to take his word as his bond. I don't trust liars.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:49, 6 January 2013 (EST)
::::Hear, hear, JPatt! This fellow Wschact is not to be trusted--I've been watching his work.--[[User:ThomJ|ThomJ]] 18:26, 20 January 2013 (EST)

== User:Wschact ==

Sorry for bothering you,
Today, I unblocked [[User:Wschact]], as I felt that the comment he made, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mystery:Why_Do_Some_Oppose_the_Likelihood_that_Obama_Is_Muslim%3F&diff=next&oldid=1027278 here], was not very bad. If you disagree, please revert back to your decision. Just wanted you to know,

[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 20:14, 5 January 2013 (EST)

ok --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:33, 5 January 2013 (EST)

Sorry to bother you again, but I hope you are aware that you added Chuck Hagel to the Obama's Religion a ''second'' time. It was already at the top of the list. Perhaps you may want to consolidate. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:33, 7 January 2013 (EST)

I am not clear as to what was the concern with [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Obama%27s_Religion&action=historysubmit&diff=1028111&oldid=1028107 this edit.] I believe the audience and the fact that he made the speech during the middle of his first term as President is important to the context. Providing a link to the full text is also helpful to the readers. I also believe that the reference to Muslim teaching against same sex marriage is important to the readers. A home schooled student should learn that a wide variety of religions teach against same sex marriage. Your wording implies that Muslims approve of same sex marriage, when there is widespread opposition. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 05:36, 8 January 2013 (EST)

:I see that you care deeply for Obama's religion. I don't know why you fear my examples so much that you have to make changes. Obama claims to be a Christian while attacking the Christian faith. You want to make it as Obama is attacking the Christian and Muslim faith. No Muslim religious people are ordered to perform same-sex marriage against their beliefs. CAIR has not made any complaints against Obama's gay policy. Muslims overwhelming voted for Obama in '12 just as they did in '08 despite his gay marriage stance. What you deem important is just another attempt to water-down my examples. Do me a favor, I don't need you to correct my work. You want to edit the other entries, go ahead. Leave my work alone. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 06:34, 8 January 2013 (EST)

==Backdoor spending authority==
Can you unprotect [[Backdoor spending authority]]? I'm still working on it. Also, User:Wschact may have some positive contributions to it. He seems knowledge on a few difficult and complicated (parliamentary and budget) processes. [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 21:09, 10 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:Jpatt

2013-01-20T23:26:30Z

ThomJ: /* Obama's Religion */

== 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]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Archive 2012 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2012]

==Obama's Religion==
The polls varied between 10% and 18%, so "1 in 4" is not an accurate summary. If you don't like my revision, we can go back to my first phrasing of the sentence, but I think this last one is better. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:08, 4 January 2013 (EST)

It is accurate (as nearly 20% is 1 in 5) [http://abcnews.go.com/WN/pew-poll-18-percent-americans-president-obama-muslim/story?id=11437070#.UOepB-R0P3M] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/18/AR2010081806913.html] and I oppose the insertion of rumor. We don't have his baptism records and Obama can't be trusted with what he says. It's not a rumor, it's not fact, it is an unknown assumption. Replacing a sentence somebody just added reeks of edit war incivility. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:18, 4 January 2013 (EST)

:In addition to the polling, the [[Obama's Religion|evidence is overwhelming]] that Obama is [[Muslim]]. Given how the [[liberal media]] censor any discussion of this issue. the polling data on it is even more remarkable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:47, 4 January 2013 (EST)
::Thank you for the feedback. From an editorial viewpoint, I am trying to maintain flow. Obama's quotation uses the phrase "rumors that have been over the Internet" and "score political points". I think that he is referring to the 2007 email blasts that started this. (I personally believe that such an effort would have come from a prospective Democratic primary opponent rather than from a true conservative.) So the sentence following the quote should stick with "rumor" rather than inject "best efforts of Obama's supporters" without any predicate. As for the polling, I believe the more polling references provided in the article, the better. I am pleased that the "one in four" language was changed. However, the bottom line is that if we are going to "let the readers decide", we should drop phrases like "Starting in 2007, unidentified people revealed that he was most likely a Muslim." I believe that the article can be written in a way that leaves CP without answering the question one way or the other. This issue is not important to me, but as the public face of CP, Aschlafly could take a serious hit in his personal reputation if this page receives widespread media attention in its current form. The folks that funded the 2007 email effort did not leave fingerprints, but it would be ironic if Aschlafly picked up the smoldering gun with his bare hands just in time to be identified as the proponent of the issue. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 03:19, 6 January 2013 (EST)

:::I wouldn't concern yourself about Aschlafly's reputation. Obama's quotation is more subterfuge. Obama could have specifically put the questions about his faith to rest, just as he could have come clean on his birth certificate. He prefers mystery that surrounds his life in order to hit his critics on demand. Despite the best efforts of Obama supporters is accurate. They don't want anybody to question Obama's words on the matter. We are supposed to take his word as his bond. I don't trust liars.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:49, 6 January 2013 (EST)
::::Hear, hear, JPatt! This fellow is not to be trusted--I've been watching his work.--[[User:ThomJ|ThomJ]] 18:26, 20 January 2013 (EST)

== User:Wschact ==

Sorry for bothering you,
Today, I unblocked [[User:Wschact]], as I felt that the comment he made, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mystery:Why_Do_Some_Oppose_the_Likelihood_that_Obama_Is_Muslim%3F&diff=next&oldid=1027278 here], was not very bad. If you disagree, please revert back to your decision. Just wanted you to know,

[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 20:14, 5 January 2013 (EST)

ok --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:33, 5 January 2013 (EST)

Sorry to bother you again, but I hope you are aware that you added Chuck Hagel to the Obama's Religion a ''second'' time. It was already at the top of the list. Perhaps you may want to consolidate. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:33, 7 January 2013 (EST)

I am not clear as to what was the concern with [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Obama%27s_Religion&action=historysubmit&diff=1028111&oldid=1028107 this edit.] I believe the audience and the fact that he made the speech during the middle of his first term as President is important to the context. Providing a link to the full text is also helpful to the readers. I also believe that the reference to Muslim teaching against same sex marriage is important to the readers. A home schooled student should learn that a wide variety of religions teach against same sex marriage. Your wording implies that Muslims approve of same sex marriage, when there is widespread opposition. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 05:36, 8 January 2013 (EST)

:I see that you care deeply for Obama's religion. I don't know why you fear my examples so much that you have to make changes. Obama claims to be a Christian while attacking the Christian faith. You want to make it as Obama is attacking the Christian and Muslim faith. No Muslim religious people are ordered to perform same-sex marriage against their beliefs. CAIR has not made any complaints against Obama's gay policy. Muslims overwhelming voted for Obama in '12 just as they did in '08 despite his gay marriage stance. What you deem important is just another attempt to water-down my examples. Do me a favor, I don't need you to correct my work. You want to edit the other entries, go ahead. Leave my work alone. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 06:34, 8 January 2013 (EST)

==Backdoor spending authority==
Can you unprotect [[Backdoor spending authority]]? I'm still working on it. Also, User:Wschact may have some positive contributions to it. He seems knowledge on a few difficult and complicated (parliamentary and budget) processes. [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 21:09, 10 January 2013 (EST)

User:ThomJ

2013-01-20T23:16:14Z

ThomJ: Created page with "Have checked in on this site a number of times, and finally decided that a second term for the traitor BHO meant it was time for me to actually sign up. Not sure how much time I'..."

Have checked in on this site a number of times, and finally decided that a second term for the traitor BHO meant it was time for me to actually sign up. Not sure how much time I'll have to contribute, but hopefully I can make a few helpful edits or additions.