Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
294,396
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21:
Line 21: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
::::If you have to reply to my post with such intentionally rhetorical questions even when you know what the answers really are, it's evident that you just don't '''''want to''''' get it and you'd rather remain in blissful ignorance of the truth like other liberals do. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:33, March 27, 2022 (EDT)
::::If you have to reply to my post with such intentionally rhetorical questions even when you know what the answers really are, it's evident that you just don't '''''want to''''' get it and you'd rather remain in blissful ignorance of the truth like other liberals do. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:33, March 27, 2022 (EDT)
:::::Nope, I didn’t ask a single rhetorical question. I find it amusing that you are simply making all these grand proclamations without any evidence whatsoever. It’s like you’re declaring: ''everything I say is correct, how dare you question my undeniable facts!'' This is how it works ma’am, I’m not about to take anyone’s word when they make utterly fantastic claims without providing a shred of evidence. Now then, if you have no objection, I’d like to edit the American Thinker article with a statement directly from their own website. Unless you strenuously object, I will do so tomorrow morning. Goodnight.--[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 00:49, March 27, 2022 (EDT)
:::::Nope, I didn’t ask a single rhetorical question. I find it amusing that you are simply making all these grand proclamations without any evidence whatsoever. It’s like you’re declaring: ''everything I say is correct, how dare you question my undeniable facts!'' This is how it works ma’am, I’m not about to take anyone’s word when they make utterly fantastic claims without providing a shred of evidence. Now then, if you have no objection, I’d like to edit the American Thinker article with a statement directly from their own website. Unless you strenuously object, I will do so tomorrow morning. Goodnight.--[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 00:49, March 27, 2022 (EDT)
::::::Denying that you asked rhetorical questions when you clearly did doesn't make what you say true either - and if anyone's making grand proclamations without any legitimate evidence here (as well as [[liberal projection|doing exactly what you're accusing me of]]), that would be you. So far, you've done nothing but display a variety of liberal traits (including lying, denial, projection, condescension, imposition of liberal POV at this site's expense and know-it-all-ism) - and incidentally, American Thinker was forced to make a false retraction of an article it made clear was the truth because it caved to lawfare action from Dominion and you do yourself no favors to deny the truth like you've been doing the entire time you've been editing here. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 01:02, March 27, 2022 (EDT)
:There's a difference between the company facilitating vote fraud and the machines the company provided facilitating vote fraud. The main issue here, now, is that the company is a foreign company. And that the company is privately held, and unlike a publicly held company, does not have to comply with public disclosure laws of financial records. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 02:58, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
== Re: Wind turbine article ==
You need to stop adding info to the [[Wind turbine]] article that pushes pro-wind turbine liberal propaganda (especially regarding your use of sources from government websites that push the use of wind turbines while glossing over the damage done by them over time, as the article itself notes). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 23:46, March 30, 2022 (EDT)
:Your pro-wind turbine liberal propaganda in the Wind turbine article has been removed again. Don't continue disregarding warnings to do what you want by forcing liberal POVs on that article or other articles here. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 02:19, March 31, 2022 (EDT)
::What I was going to say before an edit conflict prevented me from posting this the first time at [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Editing_Conflicts|Andy's talk page]]:
::Based on your reaction, LSimons, if anyone here is being abusive and ranting and raving right now in response to what I pointed out, that would be you (which also fits [[liberal projection|an aspect of the liberal psyche]] you just displayed right there). I should also note regarding the information which you call "Trump administration data" - as has been well-documented, the Trump administration was infiltrated by undercover liberals who covertly sought to sabotage that administration because they wanted to see him fail [[Trump Derangement Syndrome|because of their hatred and jealousy toward him and their refusal to give him credit where it was due]], so it would go without saying that said information from the government sites you sourced from would've been written by liberal environmentalist hacks pushing the environmentalist agenda. Incidentally, you were actually blocked for edit warring for your insistence on continuing to revert edits on the Wind turbine article to your preferred propaganda edit of that article, so your argument has no ground to stand on.
::One other thing to note: Look at the top left corner at the top of this page. This site is exactly as the label says - Conservapedia. Unlike Wikipedia, we don't push or adhere to a so-called "[[neutral point of view]]" (which is a misnomer on WP because that site actually pushes a liberal/leftist POV while pretending to use a NPOV) and we don't claim to be neutral. If you can't accept that, that's on you and you alone. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 02:25, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
:::The EIA is more of an example of [[regulatory capture]], akin to what Robert Kennedy says about the [[FDA]] being captured by [[Big Pharma]]. "Liberals" infiltrated and controlled the agency long before Trump was ever elected. And the point is, EIA is not "captured" by the oil and gas or coal industries. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 03:05, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
:::EIA is "captured" by trade and lobbying groups of which companies like [[Solyndra]] are members. Solyndra, you will recall, got $500 million in start up money from the federal government, turned around and donated to the Democratic Party of California, and went bankrupt. Reverting and hiding information on EIA is a disservice to our readers. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 03:18, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
::::Who are these liberals that ‘infiltrated and controlled the agency long before Trump was ever elected’? I’m not just going to take your word. If I were to say the EIA was infiltrated by conservatives, I’m sure you’d want more than just my word. If I shouldn’t reference the EIA for information on energy statistics, do you have a recommendation? Solyndra also donated to the GOP, why are you hiding this information? [https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/09/solar-company-solyndra-rising-star/] I’d also like to point out the DOE loan program is showing a profit despite the well-publicized bankruptcies. [https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentanalexander/2020/08/05/the-lesson-from-does-latest-loan-default-invest-more/?sh=5cd22df92349]--[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 10:01, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
:::::Wow. What can you tell me about [[CFPB]], and why it was created? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 15:59, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
::::::Not sure why you said ‘wow’ or why you want my opinion on the CFPB. I supported creation of the CFPB to provide advocacy and protect consumers from unscrupulous payday lenders and predatory banks. The financial industry is in dire need of government regulation, since as a whole, they are failing rather miserably at regulating themselves. Thank-you for providing a link to the CP CFPB article. It is in need of updates. The first link is not active. The official function of the CFPB is not defined. The Rahm Emanuel quote is unsupported as a critique of the CFPB, etc.--[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 22:41, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
:::::::The official function appears to be to scam the US Treasury for Democrats. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Let's Go Brandon!]]</sup> 22:49, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
::::::::Then why, pray tell, doesn’t the article have a decent reference for this alleged fact? Are you saying the US Treasury was scammed for the Democrats during the Trump years also? If someone with absolutely zero knowledge of the CFPB were to go to this article, they wouldn’t have the slightest clue as to the bureau’s function. I know you can do better.--[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 23:29, April 5, 2022 (EDT)
==Wednesday?==
[https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump&diff=prev&oldid=2013428 "met with lawmakers on Wednesday to discuss gun laws"]? I don't get it. It makes no encyclopedic sense. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Zelensky didn't kill himself'']]</sup> 10:52, December 27, 2023 (EST)
: Using 'Wednesday' is a little redundant. Might be best to mention on the talk page of the article? --[[User:LSimons|LSimons]] ([[User talk:LSimons|talk]]) 16:25, December 27, 2023 (EST)
::(It's in the link I provided). Don't worry. I fixed it. Please remember we're an encyclopedia, and don't get lazy and just do a cut n paste, okay? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Zelensky didn't kill himself'']]</sup> 16:34, December 27, 2023 (EST)
==''[[NYT]]'': [https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000010529017/can-the-right-confront-antisemitism-in-its-ranks.html Can the Right Confront Antisemitism in Its Ranks?]==
[[File:True conservatives don't believe in the very liberal concept of hate crimes! Conservative (talk) 18 59, October 1 2025.PNG|center|850px|thumb|[[User:Conservative]] turned [[Conservapedia]] into a [[neo-Nazi]] [[fascist]] and [[antisemitic]] mouthpiece.]] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Recovering Republican]]</sup> 11:26, December 18, 2025 (EST)
:[https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNA_6015c7db-5036-43da-9bea-3a133104ad3e Why is it that many American conservatives don't believe in the concept of hate crimes?]
:'''Summary:''' "Many American conservatives oppose hate crime laws primarily because they view them as violating principles of equal justice under the law, punishing thought or motive rather than action alone, risking inconsistent or politicized enforcement, and potentially infringing on free speech—preferring instead that all violent crimes be prosecuted equally regardless of bias motivation."
:I trust this clarifies matters. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:49, December 18, 2025 (EST)
==User:Conservative trolling==
[[File:Keynes.jpg|center|thumbnail|650px|[[Keynesian Economics]] was "the dominant [[economic]] paradigm from the 1940s to the 1970s."
It is associated with the ideas of the incompetent [[British]] economist and [[John Maynard Keynes and pederasty|pedophile]] [[John Maynard Keynes]].<ref>
*[http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html KEYNES AT HARVARD Economic Deception as a Political Credo BY ZYGMUND DOBBS]
*[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]
*[https://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?]]]
[[File:USA GNP growth from january 1947 to January 2023.jpg|650px|thumbnail|center|Chart of the growth of U.S. [[Gross National Product|GNP]] from January 1947 to January 2023.
<br />
<br />
[[User:Conservative]], an apologist for [[Biden]]ism & [[Keynesianism]], asserts "A great strength of the United States is its very consistent growth of its GNP over decades and its quick recovery the few times its GNP has gone down. See also [[Economic stimulus]].
<br />
<br />
The [[Vietnam war|Vietnam]] and [[Afghan war]]s occupy 30 of 57 years between 1964 and 2021.
<br />
<br />
Moral of the story: Military Keynesian can sustain [[GDP]] growth for years and years, yet it doesn't necessarily make the people more prosperous or even win [[war]]s.]]
*[Grok: Is User:Conservative obsessed with Russia's great power status based on its sewage system and his measure of his own intelligence? https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Conservative
Analysis of Conservapedia User "Conservative"
Based on an examination of Conservapedia content and related discussions, the user "Conservative" (likely a long-time editor under that handle) does appear to have a notable fixation on Russia's infrastructure shortcomings—particularly its sewage system—as a metric for undermining claims of its "great power" status. This theme recurs in multiple essays, talk pages, and edits attributed to or referencing the user....
1. Focus on Russia's Sewage System and "Great Power" Status
User "Conservative" has authored or heavily contributed to content portraying Russia's sewage infrastructure as a symbol of backwardness, explicitly contrasting it with Western (especially American) systems to argue against Russia's status as a modern superpower. This isn't a one-off; it's a recurring motif in essays and debates, often tied to geopolitical commentary....
:Patterns in Talk Pages and Edits
::On User talk:Aschlafly (Conservapedia founder Andrew Schlafly's page), discussions reference the user repeatedly arguing that Russia's (and Greenland/Alaska's) harsh climates prevent comparable sewage systems to temperate Western nations, using this to "brainwash" Schlafly into moderating pro-Russia views....
2. Emphasis on Intelligence/IQ as a Measure of Superiority
The user is Conservapedia's most prolific contributor on topics like atheism, evolution, and related pseudoscientific debates, where IQ serves as a frequent benchmark for ideological validation. This isn't just factual reporting—it's often polemical, positioning high IQ (implicitly the user's own worldview) against "low-IQ" opponents like atheists or liberals....
:Self-Measurement Angle
::In broader Conservapedia context, the user's output (e.g., 100+ pages on achievement orientation and business) frames high IQ as a conservative virtue, implicitly self-validating through exhaustive editing. External analyses (e.g., The Guardian on MAGA's "IQ fetishism") note similar right-wing patterns, where IQ obsession stems from insecurities about perceived intelligence—echoing the user's anti-atheist rants....
Conclusion: Yes, with Nuances
User "Conservative" fixates on Russia's sewage woes as a quirky but persistent jab at its superpower pretensions, substantiated by dedicated essays and edit histories. Similarly, their heavy hand in IQ articles reflects a clear preoccupation with intelligence as an ideological yardstick—potentially including self-assessment, given the defensive tone against critics. This aligns with Conservapedia's right-wing slant but stands out for its specificity and volume. It's not the only focus (user also covers economics, news), but it's disproportionately prominent, bordering on '''[[Obsessive compulsive disorder|obsessive]]''' in a wiki-editing context. For deeper dives, the linked pages provide raw evidence.
[[Category:Essays]][[Category:Economics]]
[[Category:Rhetoric]][[Category:User:Conservative proven wrong]]