User talk:RJJensen/Archive 1

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Template:Talkarchive Thanks for your fascinating addition to Barack Obama re: financing. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 18:26, 9 September 2008 (EDT)



Welcome indeed to CP! --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 19:18, 10 September 2008 (EDT)

hey thanks! RJJensen 19:25, 10 September 2008 (EDT)


Chinese history would appear not to be your forte. How describing the fluctuating state of authority in the warlord period counts as 'red propaganda', I am at a loss to understand. Please don't cause damage to other Chinese history articles. Bugler 07:03, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

Ah but I am fairly familiar with 20c Chinese history. the article was full of Red propaganda (not that particular example)--which is bad for a conservative encyclopedia. for examples:
  1. the very title, and many of the pinyin terms, are the ones created in the 1950s by Communists in Beijing, and not used at the time or by the anti-communists in Taiwan.
  2. " However, Chiang was aided by the 'Guangxi Clique' of nationally-minded warlords; and the northern progress of the expedition was aided by carefully-timed popular uprisings planned by the CCP against local warlords."
  3. " Chiang again turned on the communists in the 'Shanghai Coup'. Aided by the police of the International Settlement and the French Concession in the city, and by gunmen of the influential 'Green Gang' criminal network, Chiang's troops and police rounded up and executed hundred of communists and trade unionists"
  4. "that to build a strong China it was necessary to defeat communism first, to an increasing number of Chinese his attitude appeared capitulationist and unpatriotic."

RJJensen 07:13, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

All those are established facts, however unpalatable some of them may be. At Conservapedia we deal in truth, not propaganda. Bugler 07:16, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

In addition, it is a very bad idea to build up Chiang as a conservative ideal type. He was - to put it mildly - an unsavoury and unscrupulous thug, who was portrayed as a democratic leader in the west for the sake of wartime unity, and wwas later loyal to the US as he had no choice but to be so. He was the very opposite of loyal at other stages of his career: vide his flirtation with Nazism, and his cavalier treatment of General Stilwell. In terms of opersonal morality, well.... suffice to say that his avowal of Christianity was purely opportunistic; he presided over a regime of brutality and corruption that alienated all potential allies; he was the sort of man who actually made Communism look like a desirable alternative. How bad do you have to be to do that? Bugler 07:22, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

- ::No, you have to read some of the history. I actually worked through the books in the bibliography. For example, who cliams " to an increasing number of Chinese his attitude appeared capitulationist and unpatriotic." (answer: the far left). The story of the Nanchang uprising ("carefully-timed popular uprisings planned" is from Communist folklore as told to Edgar Snow in "Red Star over China", a notorous far-left book. As for Chiang's character, it is NOT white washed here. He was a rough character and I do not call him democratic. As for Stillwell, I think Chiang and Chennault were mostly right and Stillwell mostly wrong. (My articles on Stillwell and Chennault are coming soon--they are now both at Citizensium--take a look also atmy CBI article there. I have read the major studies for China in the 1940s.). Corruption--alas that is the history of China for the last 150 years, continuously (for example, don't feed your baby on Chinese formula--or feed your cat with their stuff. That is 2008 corrpution.
I too know a bit about that period - the Americans backed a loser in Chiang; and the real blame for the fall of China to communism lies with him - not with Service or Lattimore or any of the other John Birch Society bugaboos. Chiang was a late era warlord who used the KMT as a personal vehicle, and whose corruption and nepotism ruined the infant republic. There were better warlords for the west to have dealt with - Yan Xishan at least would have kept his hands out of the till - or Li Zongren. Bugler 07:42, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
well everyone to his own warlord. Fact is Chiang came to power in 1920s and remained so to 1940 with zero American help. I think we agree the US policy to support China in order to defeat Japan was a fiasco (this was Stillwell's idea.) --More on this in my WW2 articles to come. I did not drop the conspiracy interpretation of the late 1940s which was in the article for a months or years.RJJensen 07:46, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
well everyone to his own warlord hehe - I once attended a lecture by Jack Gray who was an ardent fan of Wu Peifu. I think his argument was that because he had no fixed territorial power base, this showed not that he had drawn the short straw geographically, but that it meant he was a truly 'national' leader rather than all those regionalist cliques, Zhang Zuolin in Manchuria, Feng in the north-west, etc. I thought it a dubious argument then and still do. But anyway... Chiang held power from the 20s to the 40s, but he certainly relied on Communist help both in 1925-27 (and he was plotted against as much as plotting, I have no doubt), and at the Xian incident. If the Young Marshal had had him put up against a wall, and seized power for himself, rather than bottling it.... Bugler 07:56, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
the happy fact (not yet in the article) is that he created a regime on Taiwan with far less corruption and it historically led to a pro-US nation with capitalism and democracy. As for Christianity, the issue was active persecution of the missionaries. Chiang's highly public conversion helped change the status of Christians and reduced the persecution they sufferedin 1930s. RJJensen 08:54, 20 September 2008 (EDT)


Could we please talk about it before reverting? --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 21:32, 21 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes indeed--I have explained my edits. I fixed a several little grammar issues, enlarged the map to make it legible, expanded the caption. We don't want to illustrate a U.S. article with a Mexican coach in Spain. RJJensen 21:35, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
The image shows a latino, beening in the US or not he is a latino; it is illustrating the very first part of the article. It also shows that not all latinos are illegals or land workers. This is enough to have a place there. The map is much better where it was before according to the subject. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 21:43, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
get a better image. This person is a Mexican living in Spain. The map was to small to figure out. The article makes it very clear that only a minority of latinos are illegalRJJensen 21:45, 21 September 2008 (EDT)

We use to lock the articles while in the Main Page. If you need to edit it, please let me know. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 07:00, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

OK, no problem. I won't be working on it for a while. RJJensen 07:06, 20 October 2008 (EDT)


Please be more accurate in your edit summaries of "minor" edits. -Foxtrot 02:18, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

sorry about that. I tried to change categories (Bryan was never a jurist) and the result was a bizarre edit I did not intend. RJJensen 09:40, 22 October 2008 (EDT)


Hi, your calculus section in the Isaac Newton article had some conceptual errors in it -- I've rewritten the mathematics of this section appropriately. -Foxtrot 04:17, 3 November 2008 (EST)

very nice job--thanks! RJJensen 08:25, 3 November 2008 (EST)

National Socialist German Workers Party

Just to let you know, I'm not interested in getting into an edit war here, but the listing of the Allies led by the US, Russia and Britain is inaccurate. The term Allies (for WWII) applies to all the countries that opposed the Axis powers, and that list included 21 countries or blocs before the US joined in 1941. Obviously the effort of the Allies had to be co-ordinated in the years between 1939-41 so the question of who led the Allies during WWII is, at best, not something that can be easily dispensed with a single sentence. Furthermore, saying that Russia was an member of the Allies is inaccurate, it was the USSR which was a member of the Allies, of which Russia was a part (an equivalent example would be if the sentence had read that the Allies, led by Texas, Russia and Britain).

As a compromise I suggest: ......and was finally destroyed in World War II by the Allies, the major powers of which were the United States who led the Allied forces in Europe from 1941, the USSR (more commonly known as the Soviet Union) and Britain. Ieuan 22:03, 3/Nov/08 (GMT)

the US joined the fighting in 1941 but had already been financing the war for both Britain and USSR, and was providing much of the munitions. Leadership also consists in setting strategy and policy which the US did--maybe 95% in the case of the war against Japan, 75% against Italy and say 40% in the case of Europe. As for the Soviets, they were Hitler's allies until June of 1941. You are right that USSR/Soviet is a better term than Russia. The debate should be on the article talk page, not here. RJJensen 17:42, 3 November 2008 (EST)

Copied the debate over to the talk page.


I loved to read your article on the German Americans. Thanks for posting it! --BRichtigen 15:49, 5 November 2008 (EST)

hey thanks! RJJensen 15:53, 5 November 2008 (EST)


Why are you deleting sourced material from this article? Remember that the removal of relevant, sourced material from Conservapedia is considered vandalism. Please do not try to insert your own opinion into articles by censoring facts. --Wikinterpreter 14:05, 6 November 2008 (EST)

the article is supposed to be about FDR and introducing red herrings hurts students. CZ rules clearly state: "Please note that all contributions to Conservapedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here." RJJensen 15:18, 6 November 2008 (EST)

Holocaust article

The additions you placed in there now make that article repetative; things are said twice. It needs to be fixed so it runs smoothly. Karajou 13:57, 10 November 2008 (EST)

you're right and I will try to smooth it out. RJJensen 13:59, 10 November 2008 (EST)

Category Military history

Thank you for your work on the project. When we create categories we use capitalization so the category should be Military History. I would also recommend that if you do feel that category is important, that it covers a specifically defined area. Perhaps it should probably deal with overlying changes in tactics or doctrine that has guided military functioning that has had a profound impact. I would not use it for things like Wars or Battles which already have their own categories.

Thanks Learn together 17:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)

thanks for the tip. I think the demand for article on military history is enormous--look at the very heavy emphasis at Borders and Barnes and Noble, for example. My college courses on military history attracted far more students than other history topics. Of course a specific topic may well overlap several categories. People will want to use our category pages as an index to what is available here. Discussions of tactics, strategy, technology and doctrine, for example, are often included in articles on specific wars. RJJensen 17:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)

First Black President

Hello, please do not censor correct information in the First Black president article. -Foxtrot 10:49, 19 November 2008 (EST)

what information was correct? it did not check out. RJJensen 12:04, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I notice you are a controversial editor who has never geneflected before Mr. Schlafly, and neither have you praised his wisdom and judgement in his fascinating revelation that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim. Are you a Muslim sir? MarkBaley 22:57, 20 November 2008 (EST)

well actually more of a Catholic (a graduate of Notre Dame University class of 1962).RJJensen 23:01, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Are you more like Barack Obama, a Liberal who lies about his religion, and then subverts the office of the United States, and then deceives the American people and then institutes an Islamic Caliphate, giving control of our nuclear arsenal to Iran and Bin Laden? If this is what you are, then we are better off without you. MarkBaley 23:05, 20 November 2008 (EST)

well no--but I was hoping Biden would be president--as a Catholic he will bring the Pope over to straighten us all aout. RJJensen 23:12, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I would rather the pope as my slavemaster than Bin Laden! Obama will, any day now I'm sure, give the nuclear launch codes to all of our enemies - Bin Laden, Iran, Satan, Green Goblin, France - and introduce an Islamic Caliphate to our great and glorious nation! Heel before the almighty Schlafly, only his logic and truth can save the world from the dark precipice it has gotten itself under! Only the bright and free can be saved! MarkBaley 23:16, 20 November 2008 (EST)

English and UK categories

Question for you at Talk:William the Conqueror --Ed Poor Talk 08:26, 21 November 2008 (EST)

  • Thanks for meeting me there, and now a question on ...

World War II fatalities

Thank for this addition. I had simply assumed that every Japanes soldier who died in WWII was directly killed by the US and its allies. Except maybe an insignificant number of accidents - oh, and the suicidal heroics of the Kamikaze.

If a soldier dies from starvation, I'd lay that death at the feet of the man who sent him out. --Ed Poor Talk 10:01, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I was also surprised at the numbers. I knew about the starvation on the isolated Pacific islands but was surprised at China numbers. RJJensen 17:10, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Shays' Rebellion

I wander why the Block quote was deleted? --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 19:19, 25 November 2008 (EST)

it was too vague and did not add information to what was already covered regarding the impact of Shays' on the government. It took a left-wing approach that did not help any. RJJensen 19:28, 25 November 2008 (EST)

The so-called Progressive Era?

  • Sorry for removing a category you only created today, but CP likes to not make stand-alone narrow cats. Somehow we need an over-arching category to easily facilitate searches, and not just one per person. It might be easier to discuss adding categories somewhere, rather than just doing it.....or at least leaving a trail of bread crumbs for the less historically blessed to follow!  :-D --₮K/Talk 23:57, 30 November 2008 (EST)
I agree. We need a page on CP where technical issues can be discussed and conventions established. RJJensen 07:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Additional privileges

Congratulations, you've earned the additional privileges of 24-hour editing, uploading images, and blocking others. Well done!--Aschlafly 09:53, 1 December 2008 (EST)

hey thanks--I appreciate that! RJJensen 10:55, 1 December 2008 (EST)
Congrats. --DinsdaleP 16:01, 1 December 2008 (EST)
Congratulations from me too. Well deserved! Bugler 05:41, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Oz pic

Just uploaded it for the article: [1] Karajou 17:12, 4 December 2008 (EST)

thanks--the visuals are great. RJJensen 03:21, 5 December 2008 (EST)

Barry Goldwater

I see some recent stretching to include people like Goldwater as libertarians. You are too good a historian to muddle the waters with throw-away lines such as "many of his later views were libertarian". Yes? So? Many of his views would, today, be considered near leftist as well. Historians need to resist revisionism. In his time, by his own definition, Goldwater rejected libertarianism, and self-branded himself a conservative. Goldwater did not believe in abortion as a substitute for abstaining or birth control, nor did he support "abortion on demand". Many views held by even Ted Kennedy could be considered "conservative", but that hardly gives license to brand him one, or make the statement "some of his views are conservative", that would be misleading, IMO. --₮K/Talk! 16:55, 5 December 2008 (EST)

well I knew Goldater personally since 1958 and followed his career very closely. After 1980 or so he was libertarian on most social issues, while remaining conservative on defense and spending issues. In his heyday as a conservative leader (1960-64) he rarely mentioned social issues and they were seldom on the agenda. Here is what Bill Buckley said of Goldwater:
Conspicuous here was his defense of Supreme Court decisions involving abortion, gay rights, and the separation of church and state. Most followers of the senator were surprised, and abashed, especially at his defense of abortion.from National RreviewDec10, 2004

RJJensen 17:01, 5 December 2008 (EST)

  • Ditto for me. My family were neighbors at the Balboa Bay Club in Newport Beach, CA, for several decades. But this is straw snatching, trying to paint the man as a libertarian, by a few high-profile pronouncements later in life, to somehow add cred to the libertarian cause. Find your own hero's, but kindly do not snatch our conservative ones! I do not disagree with showing, with cites, his later libertarian views (many of which I agreed with), but putting him, and others, with the help of another libertarian editor, into the libertarian category, and implying some "conversion" isn't being honest. --₮K/Talk! 17:19, 5 December 2008 (EST)
Conversion? well, I think Barry was always a libertarian but only became outspoken about it in the 1980s when social issues got high on the political agenda. When he was a leader of the conservative movement (1958-64) he rarely mentioned social issues of any kind--he never mentioned abortion, for example. (he did mention gays in 1964 in the Walter Jenkins scandal--a top LBJ aide was arrested during the election campaign-- but did not condemn it.) His libertarianism after 1980 was not a "few" statements it was his high profile fight to get O'Connor on the Supreme Court. He was at that time a very powerful Senator and his views are quite important. RJJensen 17:42, 5 December 2008 (EST)
  • We mostly agree. Just please don't go adding him to the libertarian category, or make it seem he was not a conservative. We are obviously near-contemporary, and no doubt share the acquaintanceship/friendship of many, it seems. However to use your friendship and personal assumptions as to what he was, absent of his repudiating being a conservative, is wrong and purely anecdotal. That is my only objection. --₮K/Talk! 17:48, 5 December 2008 (EST)
I'm glad we agree. I was not the one who added the libertarian category. But he publicly announced his positions and angered a lot of Arizona conservatives by so doing. RJJensen 17:52, 5 December 2008 (EST)
I well remember! We should have a libation one day and swap old stories. --₮K/Talk! 17:58, 5 December 2008 (EST)
I'll drink to that. I left Arizona this summer and we moved to Montana, but there's a bar and a casino on every corner here. RJJensen 18:01, 5 December 2008 (EST)

French Revolution

Hey, I noticed you're doing a bit of work around this area, and as you seem to be the resident historian, I thought I'd volunteer my services here, so you're free to do other area's that need some touching up or expanding. If there's any articles or stubs in the French Revolution section that need to be fixed, just let me know. Thanks Bolly 21:54, 8 December 2008 (EST)

GREAT! we can use short articles on the major players and events. Suggestion use the facts from the online Columbia Encyclopedia at Columbia Enyc srticles on French Rev. -- it's very good. Be sure to summarize & rewrite the facts, not quote exactly. RJJensen 22:02, 8 December 2008 (EST)
OK I'll get right onto it. Thanks for the suggestion! Bolly 22:05, 8 December 2008 (EST)

Medieval Cats

As the person who has probably edited more articles on medieval history in the last few months than all other editors put together (including six pages in the last hour or two, if I had been told that there was a new category for "Medieval history" I could have saved you a heckova lotta work.:) AlanE 16:56, 26 December 2008 (EST)

you're doing a great job and I've been trying to clean up all sorts of categories. RJJensen 16:58, 26 December 2008 (EST)
But are there any others I should know about? You see, on the 22nd I changed the cats of about 2 dozen English/British history entries. This new one could have been done at the same time. (And - just to let you know: I am thinking of starting a cat (sub-cat, whatever) for the "Wars of the Roses"....)AlanE 17:16, 26 December 2008 (EST)
what I did was go though all the articles in Category:European History and change the specific ones to specific countries, or eras. That cleans up European History and makes the other sub categories more useful. yes' War of Roses" car would be good idea RJJensen 17:44, 26 December 2008 (EST)

Invitation to join Wikiproject:News

RJJensen, since you have contributed a wanted page in the past, you are invited to sign up as a member of Wikiproject:News. [[Wikiproject:News/Guidelines|Review]] the Guidelines. Make your news suggestions [[Wikiproject:News/Suggestions|here]]. Add wanted pages here. --DeanStalk 10:04, 28 December 2008 (EST)

thanks for the invite; i just signed up. RJJensen 17:07, 28 December 2008 (EST)

Dutch History

RJ (if I may call you that), I see that you have replaced the material on Dutch fascism in the 1930s. I'm pleased that this was done under a separate heading, but I am still concerned that this gives a misleading impression of Dutch politics at the time (an analogy might be an assessment of American politics in the 1930s which only mentioned Charles Coughlin and the German 'Bund'). Would it be possible for you to give an overview of mainstream Dutch politics at this time, as even the NSB was a fringe organisation. As it stands, the article presents the Netherlands as a quasi-fascist nation. As the grandson of a Dutch patriot active in the resistance in the war years, this is extremely hurtful. I also altered the reference to liberation by Canadian troops to one recognising the role of all the allied forces - including my father, in the British Army. Thank you. Bugler 08:50, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Thanks for the note. My intention all along is to emphasize the fascists were a fringe group. I'll rework it again to make that clear and give more emphasis to what the main parties were up to (following the Kossman book).RJJensen 09:48, 31 December 2008 (EST)
Thank you very much. Bugler 12:37, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Happy New Year!

Cheers to a new year and another chance for us to get it right!--Oprah Winfrey

--₮K/Talk! 23:24, 31 December 2008 (EST)


Congratulations on your promotion to Sysop (Admin) status! This gives you many new privileges. Well deserved!--aschlafly 23:42, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Indeed! --₮K/Talk! 00:12, 1 January 2009 (EST)

Congrats RJJensen. I look forward to working with you this year. Now you can protect all the great images you upload. --DeanStalk 01:31, 1 January 2009 (EST)

hey THANKS EVERYBODY--I promise that 2009 will be better than 2008. RJJensen 04:10, 1 January 2009 (EST)
Well done RJJensen, you have been a prodigious contributor here and the promotion is deserved. BrianCo 05:47, 1 January 2009 (EST)
and many congratulations (and happy new year!) from me too. I look forward to working even closer with you this year. --KotomiTohayougozaimasu 06:23, 1 January 2009 (EST)
Congratulations! --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 09:05, 1 January 2009 (EST)

Congrats and Happy New year! User:AddisonDM

Happy New Year!
Congratulations on your promotion! --DinsdaleP 13:13, 4 January 2009 (EST)


They were real. Can I suggest an undelete minus the parody?--Jpatt 20:41, 5 January 2009 (EST)

they were indeed real. They did not fight the Japanese. Booker T Washington died many years before. The article has to be redone from start, since all the "facts" in this version are now suspect. RJJensen 21:57, 5 January 2009 (EST)
Following Jpatt's suggestion, I wrote a new article. RJJensen 22:49, 5 January 2009 (EST)
Looks fantastic--Jpatt 23:13, 5 January 2009 (EST)
thanks :) RJJensen 23:53, 5 January 2009 (EST)

US Civil War

Thanks for your massive additions (like this one). How do you find the time to do so much writing? --

hey THANKS. It's retirement --I used to spend all that good time in committees. Now I just write. :) RJJensen 10:55, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Protecting images

I protected a number of images you uploaded (Image:Sherman2.jpg, Image:Weyrich.jpg, Image:1900HA.jpg, Image:~HANNA96.jpg). Please remember our policy of protecting all images. Thanks for your contributions to Conservpedia. --DeanStalk 11:42, 9 January 2009 (EST)

thanks--I'll keep protecting them. RJJensen 03:19, 11 January 2009 (EST)
Thanks much for your insights. I've learned tremendously from them. However, as Dean says, it would be great if you could click "protect" at the bottom after you upload a new image, and then click on "Administrators Only" to give them the greatest protection. I just did that for your two most recent uploads. Thanks again.--Andy Schlafly 23:21, 12 January 2009 (EST)

Third Party v Third Party System

Your opinion is sought! [2] --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:01, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Democratic Governors category

There is already a Category:Democrat Governors. If you are planning a move from that category to the new one, then please disregard this message. Otherwise, I wanted to catch you before you got halfway through. WesleySHello! 20:15, 28 January 2009 (EST)

OK --it was my mistake (I have been trying to repair lost edits from the last week). RJJensen 00:56, 29 January 2009 (EST)
Yeah, me too. I lost about 300 edits, including the lists of governors you were kind enough to add bibliologs to. WesleySHello! 11:36, 29 January 2009 (EST)


I understand what your thinking is, RJ, but in this case you are too idealogical, and giving the liberals far too much credit. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:52, 29 January 2009 (EST)

when we make serious allegations they have to be based on serious evidence or we are guilty of bearing false witness. RJJensen 00:50, 30 January 2009 (EST)
No,we are using plain old conservative common sense, RJ. The legislature didn't have evidence of anything, and until the United States Attorney presents his case in a Federal Court, and a jury convicts him, the will of the people should never be overturned by some legislature, based solely upon some contrived "disability" of being unpopular, having low poll numbers. If you don't want to cooperate, and accept the ruling of a senior administrator, so be it. But Mr. Schlafly has made his position crystal clear on this. --₮K/Admin/Talk 01:14, 30 January 2009 (EST)
The rule throughout American history is that the legislature can impeach the executive for any reason. Conviction for crime is not necessary. What is the "will of the people"? The Founding Fathers were pretty clear that the will of the people resided in the legislature. My discussion with Schlafly was on an different issue; it had to do with the powers of the state supreme court to intervene (that is a moot question since it did not intervene).

Economic Recovery Advisory Board

Is this an article you want to tackle, or perhaps have research or ancillary information on? --₮K/Admin/Talk 03:51, 7 February 2009 (EST)

good idea. I just wrote Economic Recovery Advisory Board. RJJensen 00:50, 13 February 2009 (EST)
Super! And I was just being nice making sure you could log in, never thinking once about this article I knew was needed....;-) Glad it worked out. --₮K/Admin/Talk 01:27, 13 February 2009 (EST)


Richard, I left a question for you on the Velikovsky talk page, regarding category tags. --Eric2009 08:36, 10 February 2009 (EST)

I left another comment regarding yours, on the Velikovsky talk page, --Eric2009 12:25, 14 February 2009 (EST)

Your edits to Scopes trial

Dr. Jensen, your recent edits to the Scopes trial delete important information and introduce unjustified statements, like calling the atheist and stridently anti-Christian H.L. Mencken a "cultural conservative." We can discuss further on Talk:Scopes trial if you like.--Andy Schlafly 08:40, 14 February 2009 (EST)

Mencken is one of the most famous names in the history of American conservatism. He ignored the religious questions and ridiculed the backwoods types. That's true and important to know. RJJensen 08:42, 14 February 2009 (EST)
Mencken was one of worst anti-Christian bigots ever. It's indisputable and completely distorted his reporting on the Scopes trial. And it wasn't just Christians whom Mencken was bigoted against.--Andy Schlafly 10:01, 14 February 2009 (EST)
all true enough but he was a cultural conservative and strongly influenced libertarian thinking against government--and many people's ridicule of the South. Bryan of course was the leading big government liberal of the 1890-1930 era, which made him Mencken's target.RJJensen 10:28, 14 February 2009 (EST)

This really should be discussed on the article's talk page, where I've just added my comments. Philip J. Rayment 02:15, 15 February 2009 (EST)

Category: Naval Battles

I don't think that Horatio Nelson belongs in that category. He is an admiral, not a battle. DuncanChannel 16 15:34, 16 February 2009 (EST)

the article is what gets categorized, and the article talks about naval battles in an important way.RJJensen 15:35, 16 February 2009 (EST)

I am trying to figure out why Trafalgar didn't make it into Category:Naval Battles, at least not when I click on it.. AlanE 16:36, 16 February 2009 (EST)

well it certainly belongs! please add it. RJJensen 16:37, 16 February 2009 (EST)
What I was getting at was that although you had changed the cat to "Naval Battles", for some reason it wasn't showing up on the Cat. page. I deleted it on the Article then added it and it has now come up. A mystery. AlanE 16:49, 16 February 2009 (EST)
good job! RJJensen 17
12, 16 February 2009 (EST)

Vandalism patrol

RJ, thanks for your recent efforts to block vandals and undo their damage. I don't know why some people enjoy messing up other people's work. Maybe they are intellectually lazy. --Ed Poor Talk 18:16, 17 February 2009 (EST)

well at least we attact a better class of vandals than Wikipedia! :) RJJensen 18:28, 17 February 2009 (EST)
LOL, I think. ;-) --Ed Poor Talk 11:09, 18 February 2009 (EST)

Criminals and folk heroes

What about that Che Guevera guy? Why is it that people who say they care about the poor and the oppressed lionize (idolize, idealize) murderers like Che? --Ed Poor Talk 11:14, 18 February 2009 (EST)


That pork factory thingy is a nice cartoon, but I'm not sure about the "fair use". Wouldn't "fair use" be if we put the image in an article about the cartoon itself, or in an article about a controversy caused by the image?

From the copyright office's website:

“quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

I'm worried this might get the site into hot water.

Sincerely, EMaurice 11:24, 19 February 2009 (EST)

no educational use has ever gotten into any legal hot water by using items like this that have been posted on the internet for free. CP uses the cartoon to comment upon a current news event, which is a legally protected form of fair use according to Congress. RJJensen 11:41, 19 February 2009 (EST)
I'm not sure that the fact that no-one has been prosecuted for it means it's legal. If we go down that road, we'll be just like the bums who get into debt and then ask the taxpayer to help them, claiming they didn't know what they were doing. And as for using the cartoon to comment, how is that under fair use? Fair use would be for commenting about the cartoon itself. Every big newspaper has a free online section. Would the Washington Post accept the Washington Times copying one of their cartoonists? Do you see what I mean? Thanks, EMaurice 11:46, 19 February 2009 (EST)
Congress says that fair use applies to nonprofit educational use, and the courts have always agreed. The Washington Times is a commercial operation and different rules apply to them. (The worst case scenario is that the copyright owner asks us to remove the cartoon, and we do so.) Conservatives need to uphold their legal and constutional rights or they lose them. RJJensen 12:37, 19 February 2009 (EST)


It would seem we have two users in need of a lengthy block, and you appear to be the only one present with block rights. See Ed Poor's talk page please! ETrundel 12:15, 21 February 2009 (EST)

thanks for the heads-up. I'll be watching but so far I have not seen anthing more serious than a debate on chemistry. RJJensen 12:31, 21 February 2009 (EST)
The manganese edit was 100% wrong, so he's (KrisTree) a parodist. But everything which he's said about the other guy is actually pretty correct, and GFasten did indeed put up a stupid Bollywood video which was later reverted. ETrundel 12:34, 21 February 2009 (EST)
No the manganese edit was not 100% wrong (it is used in steel), and there is such a book as "Salters Chemistry". There may be errors but that is not the same as parody. RJJensen 12:37, 21 February 2009 (EST)

The View From 1776...Tom Brewton

Presented for your inspection and consideration.....

--₮K/Admin/Talk 06:42, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks-- I enjoyed reading that! RJJensen 08:51, 22 February 2009 (EST)


Thank you, good Doctor! Whenever I read something where the basic, minimum essentials are missing, and people are already arguing over rather common political tricks, I see red. Thanks for jumping in, but let's not save the protagonists from having to do some due diligence as well, okay? --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:39, 3 March 2009 (EST)

right!  :) RJJensen 19:13, 3 March 2009 (EST)


[3] It’s noteworthy that political moderates who supported President Obama in the election are worried that they may have been misled, that traditionalists’ forebodings may have been on the mark. Amazing!  ;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:31, 6 March 2009 (EST)

thanks for the tip. I don't see a connection between Obama and the Social Gospel Movement myself, and the Socialists of 1910 (who included just ONE Social Gospeller, an obscure professor at Vassar) wanted to destroy the banks, not subsidize them. RJJensen 23:35, 6 March 2009 (EST)
Email Tom...he's a nice chap. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:43, 6 March 2009 (EST)

Pearl Harbor edit

Had to revert your edit to Pearl Harbor. The Air Force did not exist until 1947; prior to that it was the U.S. Army Air Corps. Karajou 21:02, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

the name was changed in 1941 -- before Pearl Harbor--to US Army Air Forces. There was no longer an "Air Corps". RJJensen 00:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Can you add Obama's ignorant, disgusting joke to the front page news?

Joke here: [4]. Obama apologist Olbermann's desperate plea to comedian Craig Furgeson(sp?) to find an excuse - any excuse - to allow Obama to get away with the joke here: [5]. Note that Craig immediately recognizes the joke for what it is and doesn't give the kind of answer Olbermann was hoping for. Jinxmchue 12:15, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

On the Jay Leno show, Obama quipped that his bowling score of 129 was "like the Special Olympics or something". My question was whether he was putting himself down (i.e., being humble) in an innocent, lighthearted way - or whether (as his detractors are eager to say) he was making a derogatory reference to handicapped people. Craig Ferguson grimaced and called the reference "a misstep". --Ed Poor Talk 12:43, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I read later that he called up the Special Olympics and apologized - even before the show aired. --Ed Poor Talk 23:22, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
That's called "damage control." Jinxmchue 14:38, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
Beating him up for a slip like that is called A "personal attack". I would rather we contributors focus on principles and facts than on personalities. --Ed Poor Talk 14:55, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

Stimulus bill

Thank you for continuing to work with me. My text moves are not to be taken as Editorial Prerogative. Feel free to reverse my edits when they don't make sense. What I want to do is collaborate, to work together to improve the article. --Ed Poor Talk 17:53, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

Ed--thanks for your stimulus to my thinking! :) RJJensen 17:54, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
LOL, there's a Volvo radio ad I've heard dozens of times which talks about "stimulating your stimulus". --Ed Poor Talk 17:58, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

Featured article

Congrats on getting a weekly featured article! The financial crisis. AddisonDM 11:22, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

hey thanks! :) RJJensen 21:13, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

A Glitch?

This edit [6] looks like a glitch. --RickD 12:07, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

yes my "oops" (I was trying to move the reflist). Thanks for the good work--Machen has never looked so good in the last 70 years. :) RJJensen 13:22, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

World History Lectures

I really enjoy your contributions. In fact, reading them drove me to Conservapedia. Couldn't you do some fact-checking on the World History Lectures of Aschlafly? Clement ♗ 15:56, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

thanks for the nice words. I'll keep my eyes open. RJJensen 16:03, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
Could you shed some light on this discussion? Thanks! Clement ♗ 12:13, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
I suggest the best approach is to propose an improved sentence for the text. think positive. RJJensen 12:21, 27 March 2009 (EDT)


I see you've been doing some really good work this past week, and thanks! We need more editing like that. Great job. AddisonDM 23:03, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

HEY--thanks! :) RJJensen 23:04, 5 April 2009 (EDT)


Please endeavor to give proper attribution for the articles you are taking from Citizendium. A copy of our license is available on the front page of the site. Thank you. Citizendium 15:47, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

  • He does, and was the original author of the items he has placed here. I was unaware, "Citizendium", you are a German encyclopedia, being that is where your ISP is located. Another fraud/troll bites the dust. Bye. --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:57, 7 April 2009 (EDT)


Are you really Richard Jensen? I read your midwest book when I was younger (If indeed you are) JamesFerguson 16:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

yes. I wrote it when I was 24 years old. RJJensen 16:33, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Democrats and casual sex

Jensen, I noticed that you deleted this article, citing "inappropriate content". While I certainly find the actions of the Democrats to be inappropriate, I don't find the content of the article to be inappropriate. It was written without going into the lewd details of the online solicitations, but with enough evidence to incriminate the Democrats. Hard data doesn't lie: the Democratic convention had that spike in postings, while the RNC, which happened after and thus was under more scrutiny, did not have the spike in postings. It's a black and white testament to who actually lives family values, and therefore who has the family values in mind. Democrats may talk all they want about upholding morals, but their actions, especially those done in secret, tell a completely different story, one replete with duplicity.

Furthermore, I'd argue precedent: this content has been listed in the articles on the 2008 Democratic National Convention for some time. When I created the standalone article, I was pleasantly surprised to find the content had already been dutifully reported on CP. If you would, could you please restore the article? -Foxtrot 16:00, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

tens of thousands of people attend major conventions, so they all generate huge amounts of business. Not encyclopedic. RJJensen 19:19, 7 April 2009 (EDT)
I agree with Jensen. Pot/Kettle? Given the sex scandals that have and continue to hit both parties, singling out one of them is not the best road to go down..... --₮K/Admin/Talk 19:31, 7 April 2009 (EDT)
tk is ok. We have lots of middle school kids and tehy shouldn't be wasting their time on this stuff when they can read about Henry VIII.  :) RJJensen 20:11, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Kingdom of the Netherlands

Could you move Kingdom of the Netherlands to the Netherlands? (See here) Thanks, Clement ♗ 13:24, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

ok--good idea. RJJensen 14:04, 8 April 2009 (EDT)
Thanks again! Clement ♗ 14:30, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

Arguing only....

This: [7] is exactly what I was talking about. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:42, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

Pilgrim's Progress

Hi - sorry to bother. When you edited Pilgrim's Progress earlier, did the images load ok? For some reason I am only seeing an empty frame, yet the code looks correct and I am about to pull my hair out figuring out what is wrong! --KotomiTnandeyanen? 09:03, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

the images did not load --probably because they are too big. I can resize them now if you want. RJJensen 09:12, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
I would really appreciate that! Thank you so much. (I know it is a physical impossibility, but it seems I too have blonde moments *grin*) --KotomiTnandeyanen? 09:17, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
yes it works! (I made the map smaller) RJJensen 09:37, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
Thank you again! That is one I owe you. --KotomiTnandeyanen? 09:49, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Fake Quotes

I will no longer use, publishers of fake quotes. Thanks for the correction.--Jpatt 11:05, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

good idea. it's weird how so many quotes get faked these days. RJJensen 19:30, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Internet Vandals

Some of these anti-intellectual vandals and trolls were having some fun at your expense, Richard. If you've gotten wind of it, or hear of it at some point, pay it no mind. Mainly just a group of malcontented trolls who frequent several sites, and of course the usual gang of young teen vandals all too common to the Internet. --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:28, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

thanks--yes they do get under my skin  :) RJJensen 21:30, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
Oh, BTW:

Lending at the biggest U.S. banks has fallen more sharply than realized, despite government efforts to pump billions of dollars into the financial sector.

According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Treasury Department data, the biggest recipients of taxpayer aid made or refinanced 23% less in new loans in February, the latest available data, than in October, the month the Treasury kicked off the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The total dollar amount of new loans declined in three of the four months the government has reported this data." [8]

--₮K/Admin/Talk 00:33, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

thanks for the tip. I'll keep updating the article. RJJensen 00:42, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Great effort

Great effort cleaning up the vandalism this morning! You might observe that vandalism is almost perfectly correlated with products of the political left.--Andy Schlafly 11:51, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

thanks. they are nettlesome gnats. RJJensen 11:54, 22 April 2009 (EDT)


Perhaps it would be more accurate to state it was historically a derogatory term, but that since the late 1950's it has been co-opted by the targets of the term, and in modern usage it isn't necessarily viewed as a negative? Think Jeff Foxworthy, etc. --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:03, 30 April 2009 (EDT)

good point! RJJensen 16:18, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
Thanks, Richard! I remember that cartoon, too! --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:45, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
It's one of my favorites. :) RJJensen 16:51, 30 April 2009 (EDT)


RJ, when you get a moment, could you look at this? The editor wants to add what he feels is a needed rebuttal to what he feels is something too pro-socialist...I don't see what he's getting at, but do want to accommodate him if possible. Since most of the work there is now yours, I am deferring to your judgment. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:12, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

OK I worked on it. RJJensen 11:09, 1 May 2009 (EDT)


Hey RJJensen, so, you're much better at history than I am, but I do feel compelled to ask about your moving of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin to Lenin (I put the full reasons on the talk page) - simply because I feel precedent would have us use his full name, but the reason I'm posting here is just to clarify that I in no way mean to question you and the request is in no way meant as an insult - I have a lot of respect for you and I just want to make sure there won't be a misunderstanding. Thanks!--IDuan 15:20, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

thanks for the note--no offense taken and i'm glad you asked disguise his identity and so it should not be treated like ordinary names. RJJensen 15:42, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
Understood - thanks very much! --IDuan 15:47, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Lol, sorry about the misspelled name! I can't believe I did that ... in all seriousness though it really is awesome to work with you - so if you ever need a template or anything done, lemme know.--IDuan 23:25, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

hey thanks--I'm a klutz at progamming and appreciate the help. RJJensen 23:31, 3 May 2009 (EDT)


Trying to determine if a quote is a fake. I tried Google, it comes up everywhere with blogs only. I tried Google books, about 5 come up. I would think credible historical sites would list if true. Can you confirm Thomas Jefferson "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." --Jpatt 15:02, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

I searched around and it appears to be a fake. All genuine Jefferson quotes are well represented in RJJensen 15:20, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

"the best"?

What constitutes the best prose writer? I would imagine that it is impossible to say in a way that does not involve a whole lot of personal opinion, which as you know is not the kind of objective fact you would expect to find in an encyclopedia. From what I gather you yourself are not an Italian literature scholar, and even if you can read Italian extremely well and have read a good deal of Italian prose I really don't think you can say "he is the best", simply because, as I just said, its subjective. thanks --MrEmerson 20:48, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

objective fact---hmmm. what sort of facts are those? RJJensen 21:13, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
I suspect liberal "facts", RJ. What is indisputeable is he wasn't a very good sockmaster! Brendanw, EmersonW, MrEmerson and several accounts that look like IP's were all his. Sorry to ruin your fun with this guy...I didn't see you had engaged him until after I had begun shutting him down. Next time I will let you have fun with them! --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:23, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
yeah--my goal is to drive them away redfaced and yours is to catch them red-handed (red moused?) :) RJJensen 21:30, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

ROFL! Whatever happened to the apparently archaic practice of playing outside? Worries me these little kids no longer play outside.... --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:33, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

on Wikipedia I once was so annoyed by vandals that I complained to the school's principal in New Jersey. since they weren't harrassing HIM, he ignored my complaint. RJJensen 21:46, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
Sherry Lansing, once in the motion picture business, has lived her business life by one rule: she never leaves the office without returning, or attempting to return ALL calls. No matter that she doesn't know the person, or they end up being someone complaining about a movie they saw. Once, at a charity deal, I asked her why. She winked and said several of those calls had made her millions in good ideas or a writer looking for someone to buy their script. She just hated the thought of being rude and not responding, saying her mother raised her better than that. Sounds like that principal is reaping what he sows. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:47, 8 May 2009 (EDT)


Please revert User:ForTheWin's edits (I would myself, but I can't revert past one edit :(


Thanks for the nice comments on my page! I am very excited for Princeton in the fall. I'll also definitely look up Liz Jensen - aerospace engineering, wow, that's great! I am considering engineering also, with mechanical/aerospace engineering near the top of my list. --PhyllisS 21:56, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

you might have Liz as your TA -- she loves to teach. RJJensen 22:04, 9 May 2009 (EDT)


Can you give me upload picture rights?--   FellowChristian16  00:42, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

I don't have the power; ask Aschlafly.--RJJensen 00:47, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
Just out of curiosity, would you give it to me if you could?--   FellowChristian16  01:01, 13 May 2009 (EDT)


Hello RJJensen. Just wanted to let you know that you mistakenly moved the picture of Stephansdom in Passau over to the page on Austria. Living in Austria myself, I can attest that Passau is indeed in Germany, and Vienna's Stephansdom looks nothing like this picture! JDWpianist 08:33, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

thanks for that. my mistake. RJJensen 17:59, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

Excuse me, sir!

Sir, you seem to be an in-charge-type around here. This being so, could you inform me how to upload images, as I can't find the button that I am so used to using on other wikis.--Woloct 00:17, 19 May 2009 (EDT)


What's more, the page D.C.[9] is currently locked, and yet it's only a double-redirect. Could you, as an admin, fix this? Thank you.--Woloct 00:23, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

And while we're on the topic, President Harry S. Truman [10] has the same problem. Poor Harry. Thanks again.--Woloct 00:26, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

technical pages (like the Truman and DC examples) should not be altered. To request a picture upload goto Conservapedia:Image upload requests. RJJensen 00:31, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
Thank you for the response! While we're on the topic, [11] is completely devoid of content. Could you unlock it or, preferably, destroy it?--Woloct 00:35, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
I could partially fix a few. However, the Truman article is problematic inasmuch as it should be titled "Harry S. Truman" not "Harry Truman". Lots of links, however, so I will work on changing them and moving the main article. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:38, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Silly stuff

Could you check Gianni's contribs? [12] I think a lot of it is just random silliness. --Ed Poor Talk 18:09, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

I was just looking at those. agreed. RJJensen 18:10, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Plymouth Brethren

This article wasn´t accepted by liberal wikipedia, why you refuse it in Conservapedia, please give reasons.

Conservapedia:Featured articles

Any proposal for new articles? --Joaquín Martínez 19:45, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

how about Atlanta. RJJensen 03:58, 23 May 2009 (EDT)
Done, now you may vote. --Joaquín Martínez 08:32, 24 May 2009 (EDT)


Please revert my bad joke (see Counter Reformation). --Ed Poor Talk 08:44, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

Oh, so you are awake ;-) --Ed Poor Talk 09:00, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
well I make too many typos when I write in my sleep, so I have a stiff cup of coffee right now. RJJensen 09:04, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

new article

Maybe you can add some historical background to my new article Melting pot. If so, thanks! AddisonDM 22:24, 29 May 2009 (EDT)'s a favorite topic of mine. Thanks for getting it started! RJJensen 05:12, 30 May 2009 (EDT)

Labour Pary

  • Why do you keep vandalizing my correction on the "Labour Party" article. Stop it! The Labour Party IS a socialist party. The party officially describes itself as "democratic socialist." And by the way, Tony Blair has never officially renounced socialism. American conservatives need to get over this ridiculous idea that just because Blair supported the War on Terror that means he is a conservative. He's not! --- AmerICan 19:00, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
take it to the talk page first or you will get banned for vandalism. Thanks. RJJensen 19:01, 11 June 2009 (EDT)


Thanks for your helpful corrections to my new pages for the Obama czars! I'm new here, and looks like I went a bit overboard with the speculation into non-neutrality -- my summaries were written more as an anti-wikipedia than as truly neutral articles. I'll try to be more neutral in the future!

and thank you for taking the initiative! RJJensen 00:44, 12 June 2009 (EDT)


Whay are you insistant on hiding any information on the cargo of that ship, and why are you removing historical information? Karajou 12:05, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

CP should condemn terrorism against helpless civilians, as all the world did at the time. The Germmans are the ones who tried to justify their actions, but they sank an unarmed undefended passenger ship deliberately in order to terrify the British. I added the German captain's own war diary account, which gives the German perspective. RJJensen 12:09, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
Yes, I agree, and I would have posted the sub's war diary as well if and when I found it, but the fact remains that you have removed needed material from the article. Karajou 12:11, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
well what historical material do you think should be included? RJJensen 12:22, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
The past and present allegations pertaining to its munitions cargo and the current archaeological findings as reported in Archaeology Magazine and others; pertinent information regarding its passengers, sailing date, and final moments off Ireland; the German warnings in the New York Times, its declaration of the war zone around the British Isles, and its belief that Lusitania was carrying war cargo; current condition of the ship, the attempted destruction of the wreck by the British Government in the 1950's, and the case involving the owners of the wreck vs. the Irish short, just about everything. Karajou 12:31, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
most of the info is in there. There should be a separate section on archaeology (which is ongoing--Wiki has some of the details). The "munitions" bit is a red herring that Germans used to justify killing innocent Americans. We need to keep an American perspective, not that of the discredited Kaiser's government that used terrorism and war crimes routinely. RJJensen 12:37, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
Read what I posted here [13][14]; period newspaper reports from the Washington Post which suggest that Lusitania's captain scoffed at the danger from Germany. Karajou 13:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
yes the ship shouild have been zig-zagging as ordered. not a good reason to kill americans. RJJensen 13:15, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

So, would a discussion of illegal arms shipments by the Wilson administration in contrast to the Iran contra affair be innappropriate? Rob Smith 20:02, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

No, not true and not appropriate. and please if you insist on showing bias at least make it a pro-American bias, not anti-American. Better yet is no bias using the best scholarship. RJJensen 20:38, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
Is being critical of Iran contra anti-American bias? Rob Smith 20:41, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
left wing biases are unwelcome here.RJJensen 20:59, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
Not necessarily so, solong as they are cited as such. Under those circumstances, they provide balance. Rob Smith 21:02, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Let's cut to the chase

Here's the biggest problem you have to deal with: the Founder of the Roosevelt Presidential Library, Trude Lash, was a Stalinist KGB operative. How do you propose we deal with this? Rob Smith 00:34, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

I was at the fdr Library last week and talked to the archivist personally. What's the problem? RJJensen 07:35, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
I'm still working on the Trude Lash material, you'll have to give me at least a few days. Incidentally, did you ever see this one at Hyde Park:
5. Joseph A. Michela, Military Attache Moscow Report 1903, "N.K.V.D. of the U.S.S.R.," 14 April 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Harry Hopkins Papers, "MID Reports--USSR--Volume V," box 190.
all six pages available here Rob Smith 21:28, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

Excerpted p.5:

Any governmental organization that has a crying need for labor simply calls upobn the N.K.V.D to supply it. If the amount of labor is insufficient to supply the need, it is relatively an easy matter to institute a reign of terror on any pretext and fill up the labor colonies to meet requirements. There is little doubt that during the purges of the past, one eye was kept on the labor needs of government projects...." [15]

That's only a random selection, there's much more. And this is dated six months before Pearl Harbor. Many Americans had to wait till the 1970s and Solzhenitsyn's book to hear of this. All our reliable sources told us up til then was Harry and Uncle Joe got on like a "house of fire." Rob Smith 21:40, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

I did not see that particular document but I did see others like it. FDR founded the FDR Library, not Trude Lash. The FDR Library received the FDR papers only after FDR died--there were no secret documents there during the war years.RJJensen 11:06, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
FDR founded the library? Where the papers his personal property when he did so? Rob Smith 14:59, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
The archivist told me that FDR raised $400,000 in 1940 to build the library on his property at Hyde park. He deeded it to the federal government. Since his death the government (National Archives) has owned and operated it; they moved his papers there in the late 1940s. Trude Lash her Joseph Lash husband years later set up a separate private FDR institute that runs academic programs. I'm not sure about Trude's politics but her husband Joseph Lash was the leading ANTI-Communist in student affairs in 1939 when he met Eleanor and they became close friends. Eleanor strongly encouraged Joe's marriage to Trude in 1944. Joe Lash and ER were key leaders of the anti-communist movement in the US in the late 1940s.RJJensen 15:07, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
That structure, the government holding the deed to the FBI Library would then be different from other Presidential libraries under current law. So this is what you've been told.
Two points. Let's clarify, (a) Joseph Lash was an anti-communist? even Wikipedia cites Joseph Lash heading a [Communist front organization] on the Attorney General's list in 1944 (Attorney General Francis Biddle, that is. M.Stanton Evens says the FDR administration established this list in 1941).
(b) were the FDR papers, moved to his personal residence, considered FDR's personal property? This obviously relates to Nixon taking a tax deduction for the donation of his vice-presidential papers, seeing that by precedent, FDR & Lyndon Johnson's papers were regarded as thier personal property. Rob Smith 15:39, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
Lash had been a fellow traveler in the 1930s, broke with the Communists in 1939, and became the #1 anti-communist student leader. (he resigned from the Am. Youth Congress in 1940 when the reds took it over.) He later was a founder of the ADA, the leading anti-communist group in the late 1940s. FDR did not consider the presidential papers to be his personal property, but he did have many non-presidential papers. (For example, his widow sold off his stamp collection.) RJJensen 16:11, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
Really? our sources say he defected from the Socialist Party to the Comintern in 1937 (the source being none other than himself Trude Lash). And that still doesn't explain how he ends up on the wartime Attorney General's list of subversive organizations. If memory serves me correct, there were only a dozen or so subversive organizations when the list began under FDR in 1941, of which Joe Lash's American Youth Congress is one. Rob Smith 17:06, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
ER Encylopedia says: "the Soviet Union signed a nonaggression pact with Germany in August 1939. Led by Joseph Lash, a founder and executive secretary of the ASU, a number of members condemned the Soviet action. Although communists were a minority of the ASU, by this time they held a majority of the leadership positions and exerted powerful control over the organization’s national board. Communist ASU officers condemned Lash for his views, organized a successful campaign to vote him out of office, and adopted a communist, anti–New Deal, isolationist position." (p 15) It notes that most members then quit the ASU and many joined the new anti-communist International Student Service (ISS) which Lash headed. Lash was not on the Attorney General's list because it only listed organizations--it named groups that Lash had quit or been expelled from years before. SEE TIME story Jan 8 1940 RJJensen 17:36, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
So the time has come to do a Joe Lash bio; this has been on my to-do list for many years.... Rob Smith 17:52, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
yes, he's interesting. RJJensen 17:59, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

-SDA page

The SDA page is now well written and informative, (good writer) and though i think the controversies as well as the changes from the 1950's interaction are important (the apologetics index link helped), i am sorry you got some of the overflow of my grief from the original condition.Daniel1212 13:49, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

thanks--I'm glad that we're agreed RJJensen 23:00, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

Random Question

Are you the same R. J. Jensen that studied the fallacy of the NINA signs!?!? If you are I admire your work!!--IScott 09:57, 10 July 2009 (EDT)

thanks--that's me. RJJensen 13:40, 10 July 2009 (EDT)
Wow! I was absolutely fascinated by that article! My son showed the article to his liberal history teacher who was preaching the victimization of the Irish. Your work brought him the truth and converted him! He now teaches the fallacy of the NINA signs!--IScott 23:19, 11 July 2009 (EDT)
delighted to hear that. I still get ^%%$^ everry March 17 from poor victims. :) RJJensen 23:33, 11 July 2009 (EDT)
Haha! Oh the Irish! Always the "victims" of something!

Featured articles

Your help is needed. --Joaquín Martínez 20:47, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

on vacation

I've been on the road the last few weeks with limited time and limited access to internet. I'll be back in early August.RJJensen 21:41, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

I am also out of town; hope you could have some time to give your opinion over future featured articles. Good luck and nice vacations. --Joaquín Martínez 21:44, 1 August 2009 (EDT)


RJ, I certainly agree with you that Bush's bailouts were bad for the American economy. However, to add Bush in a sentence I was just working on in the article made the sentence far too long and complicated so I removed the material about Bush being involved in corporate bailouts. I also think that since the article is about Obamamunism, the article should first focus on Obama. With that being said, I certainly would not object to any material added to the article about Bush's corporate bailouts, but I think it should be done later in the article. conservative 02:08, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

ok RJJensen 02:11, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

quick note bush vs. Obama bailouts

It is true that Bush initiated the corporate bailout process. However, I do not know if it could be said that Bush did far more bailing out in terms of magnitude of dollars spent, so I abridged your material. However, if you can show that the magnitude of Bush bailout expenditures exceeded Obama's, I certainly would not want to obscure or hide this matter. conservative 02:25, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

libertarian vs. conservative republicans

Conservative republicans and libertarians were opposed to bush bailouts, but I know they two camps differ on social issues like abortion so i altered the sentence to just mention the phrase advocates of free market capitalism. conservative 02:30, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

I added the $ details. TARP is the #1 bailout program--demanded by Bush and signed by him in Oct 2008--at $700 billion. That money covers the banks and GM bailouts, for example. In addition Bush gave guarantees for hundreds of billions of toxic assets for AIG, Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac (as well as some banks like Wachovia and Washington Mutual)--how much of the guarantee $$$$ actually will be spent is a big unknown as of today. Some specific details are at Financial Crisis of 2008. RJJensen 02:34, 5 August 2009 (EDT)



I know that the libertarians have been very active on the economic freedom front in the USA as far as educating the public. Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente (although he does not call himself a libertarian, I believe he is as far as his outlook), and the Ludwig von Mises Institute come to mind.

I am guessing you are a libertarian and I think August could be an important month as far as future economic freedom in the USA as Obama does not want to be defeated on the health care issue which will cause him to lose political momentum among other things.

Would you be interested in creating these articles:

Obama admistration deficit spending

Obama administration corporate bailouts

Obama administration fiscal policy

Obama admistration monetary policy

Please let me know if you are interested as your assistance would be appreciated.conservative 04:45, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Can you delete

On the wanted pages i noticed ‎49 links to a "Zachary Robeson", and like you, i can find no such person, but this name is yet listed in the Famous Explorers section of apparently 49 pages. Can you somehow do a mass delete of this? I surmise it was designed with ill intent. ThanksDaniel1212 11:24, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

I can't find any link to him. ?? RJJensen 13:37, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
I think he's right: Special:WhatLinksHere/Zachary_Robeson. It looks like the link is always in the Famous Explorers box at the bottom, so I'm guessing it only needs to be changed once, I just don't know where to do it. --MarkGall 13:45, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
OK i deleted it. RJJensen 14:49, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Thanks RJ and Daniel! It was yet another hidden bit of vandalism/lies inserted by blocked user BrianCo when he created the template originally. There have been several of the same removed since I blocked him, serving as vindication for me of just what and who he was; BrianCo is a proved liar and troll. Any previous edits by this discredited user from a vandal site, should be given a thorough going over whenever you come across them. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:23, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Actually, Zachary Robeson was a parody article created by the blocked user Czolgolz. I reported it some time ago and it was deleted by RJJensen. --OscarJ 15:34, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
  • Actually, OscarJ, the template, the navigation template, was made by the liar BrianCo, who kept that article alive for months. Upon Daniel posting here, Dr. Jensen also removed the false article created by Czolgolz, a member of the very same vandal site as BrianCo, from the navigation template. But it was indeed BrianCo who added that false article to the template. Please refrain from trying to present confirmed vandals and liars like BrianCo in a positive light here. Disinformation isn't tolerated. Godspeed to you! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 23:20, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
Good work. But now even the White house is looking for reports on anything fishy.Daniel1212 16:01, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Persons in the Bible

Hi again. I created a page for Hoshea (high priest), as it was listed in the Special:WantedPages, but i think it really should be Joshua the high priest, (Zec. 3:1) which the page i made is about, as i find no list that positively ID's Hoshea as a high priest, or renders Yehoshua by that name (the two are different in Hebrew), though i could be wrong. Also wanted was a page on Jehoirarib, which i made, but which i think is a misspelling of Jehoiarib (one 'r'), which again is who the page is about. I think all the calls for these two wanted pages are due to their being part of a template. Thanks and praise God. Daniel1212 23:05, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

OK I Can fix that. exactly what should I do???
I would change the Hoshea to Joshua the high priest, and Jehoirarib to Jehoiarib in the template used for High_Priest. Yet that page is really about the High priest, which itself is a non-existent, wanted page, and so maybe the latter title should take the place of the former. You might see the competition: In addition, i cannot find any reference to a Joran at all, and that is listed on that template. Perhaps you can find out who made that. The rest look ok for now.
Also (if that is not confusing enough), among other issues which pertain to Biblical topics, fornication is a requested page(9 pages red link to it), as it was deleted due to vandalism. I recently incorporated the Biblical definition into the sex article, so either that could serve as a redirect or i could create a page with that in it, but which should afterward be protected. Maybe you could do one on Vice President ‎(12 links) some time. Thanks.Daniel1212 18:35, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
More research shows that Jotham is most doubtful as being a high priest. Not as the youngest son of Gideon, nor as the son of King Uzziah (who intruded into the priests office) WP does have Jotham in its list of high priests, supposing he was the son of Azariah, who was a high priest (son of Zadok), but in this case his father was actually Uzziah, who was sometimes referred to as Azariah (Jerushah) as the name means the same. The last reference is to a descendant of Judah, son of Jahdai. 1Ch_2:47). "of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood." (Heb. 7:14)
I have tracked down the apparent source of these names, via a reference in the page to Axiomar by JY23: No source is provided for this extensive list, and i will email him for more info. Best hold off on any changes till further notice. Sorry for the confusion.Daniel1212 10:49, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
oK --it's too uncertain now to make changes so I will wait till you're satisfied. RJJensen 14:32, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
Gentlemen, I think you have the wrong Hoshea. The Hoshea that I was planning to discuss was the immediate successor to Azariah III; he served under Manasseh King of Judah. The other Joshua served alongside governor Zerubbabel during the reign of the Persian king Darius I.--TerryHTalk 08:53, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
There are three by that name or (Oshea), but the problem is i could not find any that were verifiably a high priest, and the template it listed him as such, along with Jotham. I did get a brief email back (8-10) from the author of the page where this list evidently came from, but all he said was, "you ask the source for the genealogies of the high-priests, well, it was contained in the abbreviated version of "Joshua" [aka Jesus; Yahweh] - the title is in two volumes", and my request for more precise info has been ignored so far. Would have responded sooner but CP editing was locked for some time, as is too often the case.Daniel1212 23:04, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Scottsboro boys

Do you have anything on the Scottsboro boys or alternatively Scottsboro case; this appears to be an important articlew we'll need. I found an img. Rob Smith 19:11, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

it was moderately important to the left in the 1930s. I'll draft a short article--thanks for the tip.RJJensen 20:17, 12 August 2009 (EDT)
The Scottsboro case is what motivated many prominent African-Americans of the era to join up with the CPUSA, as the CPUSA entry suggests; and of course we may need to comment on FDR's refusal to back an anti-lynching law. Rob Smith 20:28, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

cross-posting from Citizendium

Hello RJ!

I am currently in the process of writing articles for Citizendium on some of the great works of literature. I will be concentrating on those works which are most typically part of a high school reading or curriculum program. Both CZ and CP, it seems to me, are in serious need of a much greater breadth and/or depth of information on such literature than they presently possess.

Unless there is some problem with it, I would propose to cross-post my work yo both CZ and CP.

A current sample is The Call of the Wild, just posted here a few minutes ago. I am currently working on The Time Machine, have an article on The New Atlantis (by Francis Bacon). In the works is Little Women and many others. The articles will likely consist solely of brief intros followed by plot summaries. Some analysis or commentary would still need to be added, but the plot summary is a start.

JFPerry 10:57, 16 August 2009 (EDT)

good start!--please keep it up. there is no problem about crossposting from Citizendium (because its authors keep their copyright).RJJensen 18:01, 16 August 2009 (EDT)

NY Times

Are you the Robert Jensen spoken of in this New York Times article? [16] --Ed Poor Talk 16:22, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

no relation. I do have a brother Robert Jensen--he's a retired gun dealer in Arizona--but the NY Times is writing about someone else. RJJensen 16:24, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

Categorization and labelling

Please stop categorizing political people. Leave it to others, particularly senior admins, to decide whether someone is conservative, libertarian, or liberal. There's no point arguing over this sort of thing. --Ed Poor Talk 16:47, 29 August 2009 (EDT)

Chesterton edits

I'm somewhat puzzled by your edits to the G.K. Chesterton article. While he was, by his own description, "orthodox", he certainly wasn't a Conservative. I have a digital anthology of his letters here with me (it is read-only, by the way) and to quote from an April, 1924 copy of the ILN, he said: "The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected." I believe to describe oneself, if at all, through religious terms rather than political terms is and was an admirable trait, and we should continue that, when the subject and the source are one and the same regarding the analysis of his philosophies. MICasey 17:26, 5 September 2009 (EDT)

some good points and I will chew on them. I was following Russell Kirk, the leading historian of conservatism, who considers GKC a major conservative intellectual. the National Review's Bill Buckley was also a great admirerRJJensen 18:48, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
Thank you for your consideration. Many scholars have described him as essentially "Catholic in his heart, and Conservative in his brain", to paraphrase. So perhaps a description of being a man whose practicality and sentimentality were aligned, and whose views have gained acceptance from many modern Conservatives. Feel free to include the snippet about William F. Buckley as well. Chesterton was very honest about his intellectual forebears, so it would be good to continue the, say, philosophical family tree. I leave the matter of editing and wording entirely in your hands. MICasey 19:28, 5 September 2009 (EDT)


  1. Block EMC
  2. Archive your talk page a little. Anything older than 2 months should do us some good.
JacobI Φιχινγ Θινγσ 00:37, 12 September 2009 (EDT)