Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

BBC America

2013-02-27T01:59:13Z

EdgarP: +cat

BBC America is an American television network. It is owned by the BBC and is available on satellite and cable.
[[Category:Broadcasting]]

64-bit Windows

2013-02-27T01:57:31Z

EdgarP: +cat

'''64-bit Windows''' is a version of [[Windows]] by [[Microsoft]] that uses 64 bits of data to be processed in parallel and can handle more than 4 GB of system RAM.

Windows XP, Vista, 7, and 8 all have 64-bit versions.

64 bit versions of Windows are not backwards compatible with 16-bit software (anything that would run on the MS-DOS or Windows 1.0/2.0/3.x operating systems), though they are able to run over 99% of all 32-bit programs, though hardware drivers need 64-bit versions to function.

16-bit software can be made to run only through an emulation mode (such as Windows 7's "XP Mode") or virtual machine program that runs a virtual copy of another OS and recreates it's capabilities while running a 64-bit OS.

==See Also==
* [[32-bit Windows]]

==External Links==
* [http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/num/64bit.htm Definition of 64-bit at Computer Hope]

[[Category:Computer Programming]]

The Shining

2013-02-27T01:55:17Z

EdgarP:

The Shining was a film starring famous Laker fan Jack Nicholson and [[Shelley Duvall]]. It was based on a horror novel by [[Stephen King]]. It was directed by the renowned director [[Stanley Kubrick]]. Many of its best known scenes feature the image of the ghosts of two young murdered girls, and an elevator full of blood.
[[Category:Movies]]
[[Category:Horror_(Film)]]
[[Category:Novels]]

Lincoln (film, 2012)

2013-02-27T01:52:02Z

EdgarP: +cat

'''''Lincoln''''' is a 2012 film by director [[Steven Spielberg]], starring [[Daniel Day-Lewis]] as [[Abraham Lincoln]] during the last four months of his life, focusing on the lame duck session after reelection to his second term as President, in which he achieved the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in the House of Representatives. The film was nominated for 12 Academy Awards, winning two including Mr. Day-Lewis's third Oscar for best actor. The screenplay is based in part Doris Kearns Goodwin's biography, Team of Rivals.

==Plot synopsis==
As the Civil War drags to a close, the President's thoughts move to the reconstruction, and the urgent need to replace his Emancipation Proclamation, a war measure, with an amendment definitively freeing the former slaves. Time constraints, the difficulty of passing the Amendment in the Secession States, and the competing radical and conservative factions in the Republican party, lead him to embark on a risky strategy of secretly summoning Confederate representatives to Washington while simultaneously having his political operatives covertly approach lame duck Democrats with promises of federal positions in return for support in the House for the Thirteenth Amendment.

[[Category:Movies]]

[[Category:Presidents of the United States]]
[[category:United States History]]
[[category:American Civil War]]

Argo (2012 film)

2013-02-27T01:49:49Z

EdgarP:

'''Argo''' is a conservative [[drama]] based on the true story of the [[Canadian Caper]] that occurred during the midst of the [[Iranian Revolution]] and the [[Iranian Hostage Crisis]]. The film was a financial and critical success, earning several awards, including the [[Academy Award]] for Best Film in 2013.

==Plot==
'''''Warning: Potential Spoilers below.'''''

The film begins at the start of the Iranian Hostage Crisis on November 4, 1979. As the American Embassy is being overtaken by a mob of Iranian students, six American diplomats manage to escape the complex, seeking refuge at the Candian Ambassador Ken Taylor's residence, where they would remain for the next 79 days.

In the United States, Tony Mendez ([[Ben Affleck]]) works with the [[CIA]], the [[Canadian]] government, and eventually Hollywood, to devise a plan to rescue the six Americans. The final plan is for Tony to fly to Iran as a Canadian film maker, and for the six Americans to be various staff members for a movie named ''Argo''. In order to carry out the ruse, the CIA financed a fictional movie studio (Studio 6), advertisements were placed in ''Variety'' magazine, and even storyboards for the film were created. At the same time, the Iranians have realized they are missing six hostages, and they are weaving together shredded documents from the American embassy, which could expose the six Americans.

Using forged Canadian passports and Visas, Tony and the six Americans manage to get through security, and after nearly being caught, are allowed to board a Swissair jet to Zurich. As the plane begins to taxi, the Iranians realize that the film crew are really the missing six. The plane takes off just as Iranian security is about to stop them from taking off.

==Reception==
Argo currently has a 96% 'fresh' rating from Rottentomatoes.com. It was nominated for and won many awards, including the [[Academy Award]] for Best Picture, a Golden Globe for Best Picture - Drama, and a Critics Choice Award for Best Picture.

[[Category:Movies]]
[[Category:Hollywood]]
[[Category: Greatest Conservative Movies]]

Talk:Fidel Castro

2013-02-27T01:40:34Z

EdgarP: /* Occam's razor */

__TOC__
I’ve heard Castro called many things, but terrorist is not one of them, can someone explain why he is listed as a terrorist? Also could the information justifying that categorization be added to his page?--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:33, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

:''4. We do not attempt to be neutral to all points of view. We are neutral to the facts. If a group is a terrorist group, then the label "terrorist" is used here but not on Wikipedia.'' (See [[Differences_with_Wikipedia]])
:see [[Terrorism]] for a description of a terroist. Castro certainly was one.
:[[User:BillyBoy|BillyBoy]] 14:41, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

::It seems it depends on which of those definitions you are using as to whether or not Castro can be called a terrorist. If you are using the first definition, you can’t call him a terrorist (to the best of my knowledge) as the editorial policy here is (or seems to be) that we don’t say people (or possibly just living people) are guilty of doing something illegally (or, one assumes, unlawfully) unless they have been convicted of doing so. The second definition also probably doesn’t apply as Castro overpowered Batista with force not fear. The third definition (the one implicit in the discussion of Terrorism) may apply to Castro but I’d want to see evidence that he actually used “terror” to achieve his end—violence and intimidation clearly were used, but I’m less sure about terror (and if one part of a conjunction is false the whole of it is, so without some evidence that he used terror to achieve his end, you can’t call him a terrorist).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:19, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Castro couldn't have been convicted of being a terrorist because he terrorized the legal authority that could have convicted him out of existence.
:::[[User:BillyBoy|BillyBoy]] 15:26, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

::::That does seem to be a problem with the editorial policy (though I would say he used violence rather than terror to end the previous Cuban government), but I don’t make the policy (I’ve even argued against it). I’m just telling you what I gather the policy is. --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:29, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

"the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."

By that definition Batista was a terrorist with his coup in 1934, just as Castro is, or George Washington for that matter...

It's all about the word "unlawful", which generally doesn't have the same meaning in different times and countries.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

== DIctator/President ==

Interesting to note that Castro "has been the dictator of Cuba since 1959 and ''has called himself'' the President of Cuba since 1976," whereas [[Pervez Musharraf]] "''became'' President of Pakistan, ''via a coup''" (emphasis mine). What in essence is the difference? [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 12:46, 19 February 2008 (EST)

:For a dictator, he certainly relinquished power without much of a struggle. [[User:Rugxulo|Rugxulo]] 18:53, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

==Castro Dead?==
Can we see some hard evidence suggesting this? Just because he is keeping to himself dosn't mean he has died. He is still the Secretary of the communist party--[[User:WilliamMc|WilliamMc]] 12:37, 29 December 2009 (EST)

:Maybe Fidel Castro is alive and even editing this site!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:08, 29 December 2009 (EST)

::Speculation is not necessary here as Castro is no longer running the show. His brother Raul Castro was innagurated as acting President in July 2006. Until such evidence is shown speculation of his death is ultimately baseless. Please do not add any. This is not a gossip site after all. --[[User:Matthew2208|Matthew2208]] 16:02, 29 December 2009 (EST)

:::Matthew, you're clueless here. When someone is missing for 3.5 years and there is an incentive to lie about his fate, then he's presumptively dead. Communists don't define the truth. God does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:01, 29 December 2009 (EST)

::::In October Castro allegedly met with the leader of Cyprus and a Chinese official. [http://nba.msg.com/photo/0a1W9IQclz2DV Here] is a supposed photo of Castro with Wu Bangguo. It's released by the Cuban state media, but apparently the (obviously liberal) AP found it sufficiently convincing as to endorse it.
::::Obviously it's possible that the leader of Cyprus (and at least three other leaders who have allegedly met him since July) was paid off to lie about this and the photo is of a lookalike (or older). But true or false, matters are perhaps not quite so simple as Fidel simply disappearing for the last few years, and we should carefully consider the evidence. --[[User:JimR|JimR]] 20:13, 29 December 2009 (EST)
:::::Fidel, like many dictators, had body and face doubles, like the one we famously killed of Saddam in the opening salvo of the Iraq invasion. It seems far more likely to me that they just passed a double off as Castro than that they bribed a foreign head of state. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:16, 29 December 2009 (EST)

::::::[[Liberal denial]] illustrates its [[double standard]]. Natalie Holloway has been missing for a period comparable to Fidel Castro's absence, and no one would deny the likelihood that she is dead. It doesn't matter what the authorities might say. But no [[liberal]] will admit that Castro is likely dead also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:31, 30 December 2009 (EST)

:::::::Well, the difference there is that Natalie Holloway disappeared, whereas Castro hasn't been seen in public for years. By that logic Macaulay Culkin is also dead. But seriously, Castro certainly could be dead, but that doesn't mean he is. If I had to guess, I'd say he's not. I think if he had died they would have staged an enormous funeral for him with all sorts of parades, teeming with propaganda. Dictators love that stuff. But that's just my opinion. [[User:DanL|DanL]] 12:08, 30 December 2009 (EST)

I just noticed that this made "[[Liberal Denial]]." DanL seems to make a good point Andy. I guess what I don't see is:
*a) What motivation the Cubans would have to lie about Castro being dead and
*b) What motivation liberals would have to insist that Castro is alive if he really were dead. It seems like a really obscure point at best. Personally, I'm assuming that Castro is alive for the same reason everyone else does: dictators don't just pass away unnoticed. Or is there a historical precedent I'm missing? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 12:25, 30 December 2009 (EST)

Mr. Schlafly, I'm confused about whether you're saying you know he's dead or that you presume he's dead based on not being sighted in public. I just checked the news and there are quite a few references to him making statements recently. Are you saying someone is lying? If so, to what end? And the Holloway story is different in that she disappeared. You just haven't seen Castro lately. Others appear to have because they recorded his statements. [[User:Hectoruribe|Hectoruribe]] 12:38, 30 December 2009 (EST)

'''Motivation''' would primarily to conceal the power struggle while the fascists decide who's going to be the new dictator. Communists lie about everything else - particularly [[mass murder]] (see also [[genocide]]). The kind of political power that "comes out of the barrel of a gun" rather than the curtains of a voting booth is well disposed to deception. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:22, 30 December 2009 (EST)

:DanL and JDW seem to think that if a brutal communist regime claims someone is alive, then we should take that at face value even though he hasn't been seen publicly in 3.5 years. But they don't answer the question of why they believe communists when, for example, they probably wouldn't believe a similar claim that another missing person (such as Natalie Holloway) is still alive. As each day goes by without a public appearance by Fidel Castro or credible independent verification (e.g., a meeting with Republican congressmen), the chance Fidel Castro is still alive decreases. How much longer do DanL and JDW require before admitting that the chance has dropped to less than 50%? After 3.5 more years? 10 more years?

:Communists lie about everything. There's little reason to believe that the Russian dictator Yuri Andropov died when the communists said he did, given the long period when no one could confirm he was still alive either.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:20, 30 December 2009 (EST)
::It's not just Cubans who say he's alive. Castro himself wrote several articles in the last few months and the president of Argentina met with him in Cuba. Do you think he's dead because you believe communists are in general liars? [[User:Hectoruribe|Hectoruribe]] 15:36, 30 December 2009 (EST)
:::Well if you have doubts, feel free to fly down to Havana and see him for yourself. And while you're there, see about getting the right to criticize Castro's government...or the right to free speech in general, or the right to assemble freely with like-minded persons, or the right to attend the church of your choice, or the right to possess a gun just in case the government gets a tad-tyrannical. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:55, 30 December 2009 (EST)

:::(edit conflict) Wow, Hector, that seals the case ... Castro supposedly wrote some articles! Of course that proves nothing.

:::Castro was a communist dictator. He reveled in worship of him by the public. After he's been missing for a period of time from self-serving public events, a period that started with a life-threatening medical condition and complex surgery, the chance that he is still alive decreases with each passing day. The [[liberal denial]] of this is remarkable.

:::Perhaps the closure by liberals will come when the New York Times finally runs a front page article asking these questions. Then, as soon as the communists can arrange it without being too obvious, they will announce that Castro just passed away.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:00, 30 December 2009 (EST)
::::I don't really care either way since I don't have a horse in this race. If you'll notice, I'm just asking you questions, not taking a position one way or the other, so I'm not in liberal denial, whatever that is. I'm just concerned that you're not addressing that the president of Argentina met with him earlier this year. Hugo Chavez met with him more recently. Are these men liars? [[User:Hectoruribe|Hectoruribe]] 16:03, 30 December 2009 (EST)
:::::Well, I guess your statement "I don't really care either way" constitutes the bonafide end of your argument. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:07, 30 December 2009 (EST)
::::::I'm sorry I came off as flippant there. I don't care whether he's alive or dead, to be honest, but I do care that the article reflect the truth instead of speculation. Thanks for pointing out my error. [[User:Hectoruribe|Hectoruribe]] 16:14, 30 December 2009 (EST)
:::::::What you need to do is to read the Bible as you said you try to do on your user page, specifically Revelation 3:14-18; it tells of what Jesus will do to a church that "doesn't really care one way or the other":
::::::::''And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.''
:::::::[[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:19, 30 December 2009 (EST)

::Of course I don't take anything Communist regimes say at face value. They do indeed lie more than they tell the truth. Still I don't see the motivation in this case, as Castro is no longer even the leader, thus the power struggles Ed mentioned wouldn't be in play. Furthermore, I stand by my point. Dictators don't die unnoticed and unanounced: Stalin died and a massive funeral was organized overnight. Mao died and the same happened. Kim Il Sung, Hitler, you name it, no one kept their deaths a secret, because there was no reason to put off a big dramatic funeral and public outpouring of love for the Dear Leader. Can you name a single instance where a dictator died and his death was covered up?

::Not to mention, no one's touched my second question. What motivation would liberals have to ''deny'' that a dictator has died? To put it nicely, this whole issue sounds like shadow-boxing to me. [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 16:40, 30 December 2009 (EST)

:::I do not know about Fidel Castro, however in history there were cases in which a leader died and a weaker leader took over, pretending to serve the interests of the previous leader. If Raul Castro is unpopular, maybe he pretends his brother is alive to use his power? I am not saying that this happened, but it is not without precedent.--[[User:Wuhao1911|Wuhao1911]] 16:59, 30 December 2009 (EST)

::::Well, apparently he's alive. He's made a public reappearance a couple of days ago. He looks quite ill, though. --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 14:02, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

:::::And he was wearing a Nike jacket. Where is his hate to "American Imperialism"? This is liberal hypocrisy at its worst. I bet most cubans are not even allowed to buy one of those jackets.--[[User:Quetzalcoatl|Quetzalcoatl]] 14:56, 12 July 2010 (EDT)
::::::CBS News reporting on Castro death rumors: ''[http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-215_162-1859015.html State Secret: Is Castro Dead?]'', Brian Goodman, September 22, 2009. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:19, 22 April 2012 (EDT)

Since the last contribution to this discussion was two years ago, I just thought I'd chime in. Unless there was a revolution in plastic surgery I'm unaware of, this is Fidel Castro, speaking about Obama and the Republican nomination. He speaks about recent events in Syria and Lybia, mentions the POTUS as being almost powerless (so obviously he means Obama), and the last time there was a Republican nomination without a Dem nomination at the same time was in 1996, so this video could hardly be that old. Is this enough for us to at least consider the possibility of him being alive?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPcXhLojPo8
[[User:Fbelard|Fbelard]] 14:35, 15 July 2012 (EDT)

Here's a recent picture of himself, his brother, and Hugo Chavez: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/13/fidel-castro-hugo-chavez-colombia-farc-talks]. [[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 08:14, 14 October 2012 (EDT)

And here`s a picture of February the 3rd 2013 http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/02/04/fidel-castro-says-hugo-chavez-condition-improving-in-battle-against-pelvic/ --[[User:Alex00|Alex00]] 13:31, 5 February 2013 (EST)

:The man photographed is too young to be Castro - look at his skin, the tell-tale sign of age. He's also too short to be Castro, assuming average height for those around him.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:48, 5 February 2013 (EST)
::Watch this [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567465/fidel-castro-hits-polls-in-rare-public-appearance/ video]. You can clearly see that the man in the video is elderly, frail, and stooped with age. You can also see that the man is quite obviously Fidel Castro. --[[User:DonnyC|DonnyC]] 14:05, 5 February 2013 (EST)

:::Your comment is non-responsive to my specific points: the stand-in's skin is too young (and dissimilar to Castro), his height is too short, and it is generally implausible that an extremely sick, elderly man who likely had a terminal disease in 2006, is inexplicably fit and active more than six years later.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:30, 5 February 2013 (EST)
::::Try watching the video I linked to. The man isn't short, he's become severely stooped with age. His skin is on par with individuals of his age, and if you had watched the video, you wouldn't be describing him as "fit and active". --[[User:DonnyC|DonnyC]] 15:12, 5 February 2013 (EST)

== Category liberalism ==

Really? He's a communist. I think most people, including himself, would say that he's not a liberal. [[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 03:45, 20 October 2012 (EDT)

== He's alive ==

Multiple reference testify to Castro's continued life. Please supply references proving otherwise before reverting again. I refer you to your own Conservapedia Commandments. Obey them or admit they are no longer relevant to this project. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 17:18, 24 February 2013 (EST)

== Occam's razor ==

By this point, we should all admit to ourselves that Fidel Castro is alive. Old and haggard, certainly. But not dead. He has appeared in public multiple times. His appearances have become rare, but this is understandable given his age. And besides, Cuba may be a dump, but Castro is still a powerful man. He can avail himself to state-of-art healthcare if he wishes it. His alleged condition, diverticulitis, is hardly a death sentence, and can be cured by antibiotics. The root disease, diverticulosis, can be managed by a simple change in diet. It seems that if Castro did indeed have diverticulitis, he suffered complications and had to have surgery. it's possible that complications in the surgery may have lead to bacteria escaping the colon and killing him, but this brings us down to two competing hypotheses. 
Castro is dead 
Castro is alive 
Given that he has appeared in public, the likelier explanation is that he is alive. 
Castro will eventually die, sooner rather than later. But until then, Conservapedia embarrasses itself by claiming he is dead.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 21:31, 24 February 2013 (EST)
:So, no comment? I'll fix up the article in a few days if nobody objects--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 10:36, 26 February 2013 (EST)
::You will be reverted and possibly blocked. You should know better after all the discussion on this site that shows you without any doubt at all that the owner of the site wants it this way. [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 17:41, 26 February 2013 (EST)

:::So why was the "Fidel" who supposedly met the [[Pope]] wearing a heavy scarf on a hot day, and stood much shorter than the real Fidel? See [[Mystery:Did a Fake Fidel Castro Meet the Pope?]]--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:56, 26 February 2013 (EST)
:Well there is one news source[http://www.theonion.com/articles/humiliated-team-of-cuban-doctors-forced-to-continu,31448/] that claims Castro is dead :). -[[User:EdgarP|EdgarP]] 20:40, 26 February 2013 (EST)

Argo (2012 film)

2013-02-27T01:29:52Z

EdgarP:

'''Argo''' is a [[drama]] based on the true story of the [[Canadian Caper]] that occurred during the midst Iranian Revolution and the [[Iranian Hostage Crisis]]. The film was a financial and critical success, earning several awards, including the [[Academy Award]] for Best Film in 2013.

==Plot==
'''''Warning: Potential Spoilers below.'''''

The film begins at the start of the Iranian Hostage Crisis on November 4, 1979. As the American Embassy is being overtaken by a mob of Iranian students, six American diplomats manage to escape the complex, seeking refuge at the Candian Ambassador Ken Taylor's residence, where they would remain for the next 79 days.

In the United States, Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) works with the CIA, the Canadian government, and eventually Hollywood, to devise a plan to rescue the six Americans. The final plan is for Tony to fly to Iran as a Canadian film maker, and for the six Americans to be various staff members for a movie named ''Argo''. In order to carry out the ruse, the CIA financed a fictional movie studio (Studio 6), advertisements were placed in ''Variety'' magazine, and even storyboards for the film were created. At the same time, the Iranians have realized they are missing six hostages, and they are weaving together shredded documents from the American embassy, which could expose the six Americans.

Using forged Canadian passports and Visas, Tony and the six Americans manage to get through security, and after nearly being caught, are allowed to board a Swissair jet to Zurich. As the plane begins to taxi, the Iranians realize that the film crew are really the missing six. The plane takes off just as Iranian security is about to stop them from taking off.

==Reception==
Argo currently has a 96% 'fresh' rating from Rottentomatoes.com. It was nominated for and won many awards, including the Academy Award for Best Picture, a Golden Globe for Best Picture - Drama, and a Critics Choice Award for Best Picture.

[[Category:Movies]]
[[Category:Hollywood]]
[[Category: Greatest Conservative Movies]]

Argo (2012 film)

2013-02-27T01:27:32Z

EdgarP: Created page with "'''Argo''' is a drama based on the true story of the Canadian Caper that occurred during the midst Iranian Revolution and the Iranian Hostage Crisis. The film was a f..."

Worst College Majors

2012-11-25T21:06:06Z

EdgarP:

The '''worst college majors''' are fields of study that leave the student with relatively few job opportunities and often a distorted or ultra-[[liberal]] view of the world. Students incur an average debt in excess of $25,000 for attending college, and these college majors can leave such students without the ability to pay off their loans, which are typically not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Adding insult to injury, [[liberal]] colleges have begun charging students more if they decline one of the '''Worst College Majors''', and study something of value instead.<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/story/2012-04-24/differential-tuition-increase-major/54513940/1</ref>

==Undergraduate majors==
# [[Feminism|Women's studies]],<ref>"Women’s studies ... is disappearing from British universities. ... Students have begun to realise, too, that women’s studies is useless for getting you a job. It’s no coincidence that the subject’s collapse coincided with the introduction of tuition fees. The moment you start paying for something is the moment you consider whether it’s really worthwhile." [http://www.theinsider.com/news/639292_The_End_Of_Women_s_Studies_And_Other_Useless_Qualifications]</ref><ref>http://www.boundless.org/2000/features/a0000225.html</ref><ref>http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/why-is-gender-studies-dominated-by-one-gender-1.289830</ref> sometimes included as part of "gender studies"<ref>http://www.whitman.edu/content/genderstudies</ref>
# [[Atheism|Secularism]]<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/us/08secular.html</ref>
#[[Homosexuality|LGBT]] studies<ref>http://www.yale.edu/lgbts/</ref><ref>http://www.lgbts.umd.edu/</ref>
# Black studies <ref>[http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-most-persuasive-case-for-eliminating-black-studies-just-read-the-dissertations/46346, The Most Persuasive Case for Eliminating Black Studies? Just Read the Dissertations. The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 30, 2012]</ref>
# Hispanic studies
# Film<ref name=georgetown>[http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/whatsitworth-complete.pdf What's It Worth?] Georgetown University, July 2011</ref>
# Puppetry
# English [[Literature]]/Literary Criticism
# Music Therapy<ref name="georgetown" />
# Dance<ref name="georgetown" />
# Interior Design<ref name="yahoolist" />
# Art History<ref name=yahoolist>[http://finance.yahoo.com/college-education/article/110196/20-worst-paying-college-degrees-in-2010 20 Worst-Paying College Degrees in 2010] Yahoo! Finance, 08/12/2010</ref>
# Sequential Art<ref>http://www.scad.edu/sequential-art/index.cfm</ref>
# Surf Science and Technology<ref>http://www1.plymouth.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/1645/Pages/CourseOverview.aspx</ref>
# Golf Management – University of Birmingham / Florida Gulf Coast University
# [[Evolution|Evolutionary biology]]
# Journalism <ref>http://www.foxbusiness.com/slideshow/personal-finance/2010/06/28/worst-fields-graduates/#slide=4</ref>
# Psychology<ref name="georgetown" />
# Fashion Design
# Theater<ref name="georgetown" />
# Horticulture<ref name="yahoolist" />
# Human Resources<ref name="yahoolist" />
# Photography<ref name="georgetown" />
# Video Game Design<ref>One observer noted that not even the video game industry typically hires people who majored in video game design.</ref>
# Forestry/Range Management/Wildlife Management
# Environmental Studies
# Outdoor Recreation
# Fine Arts<ref>http://www.artcareer.net/faqs/job-market-outlook-for-artists-and-designers/</ref><ref name="yahoolist" />
# Anthropology
# Sociology
# History of Music
# Climatology
# Comparative Religion
# Gaming Management<ref name="cat">[http://www.umac.mo/iscg/courses/gmdiphome.html 10 Worst College Majors for Employment]</ref>
#Creative Writing
#Ethnic Studies
#Art History
# Paralegal studies/prelaw<ref name="yahoolist" />
#Philosophy<ref>[http://www.toptenz.net/to-10-useless-college-classes-degrees.php]</ref>
==Graduate programs==
#Law school<ref>[http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/13/2894758/job-market-grim-for-recent-law.html Job market grim for recent law school grads] by Alejandro Bolívar, July 13, 2012, ''Miami Herald'', retrieved July 26, 2012</ref>
(please add to the list)

==Courses==
# The Colbert Report: American Satire Writing Seminar - Boston University <ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cody-brotter/bu-offers-stephen-colbert_b_810122.html Class Credit for Colbert College Course, Huffington Post, January 18, 2011]</ref>
# Understanding Obama - Harvard Law School <ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/harvard-law-offering-understanding-obama-course-taught-by-obama-mentor/</ref>
# Revolutionary Marxism - Portland State University <ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/portland-state-university-offering-revolutionary-marxism-course-and-wait-until-you-see-the-syllabus/ </ref>
# Why Occupy Wall Street? The History and Politics of Debt and Finance - New York University <ref>[http://weaselzippers.us/2011/12/09/n-y-u-to-offer-classes-on-occupy-wall-street/ N.Y.U. To Offer Classes On Occupy Wall Street, Weasel Zippers, December 9, 2011]</ref>
# Occupy the Field: Global Finance, Inequality, Social Movement - Columbia University <ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2012/01/02/occupy-101/ Columbia University to Offer ‘Occupy 101′ Course, January 2, 2012]</ref>
# Football Culture
# Queer Musicology – UCLA
# The Science of Harry Potter – Frostburg University <ref>CBS News: ''Harry Potter Goes To College: Professor Uses Boy Wizard To Explores Links Between Magic, Science'', by Bootie Cosgrove-Mather, Sept. 26, 2003 [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/19/national/main584456.shtml] ''...Frostburg State President Catherine R. Gira said she isn't worried that some may view a Harry Potter class as trivial. "Irrespective of the specific title of the course, the 'magic' in the fiction is being analyzed by applying concepts of physics, chemistry, biology and engineering. This honors course creatively packages scientific principles in a contemporary way that will interest today's students," Gira said.''</ref>
# Native American Feminism - University of Michigan
# Cyber Feminism - Cornell University
# Feminist New Black Man - Occidental College <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvlL_lDk4ko Jason Mattera At CPAC, YouTube]</ref>
# Philosophy and Star Trek – Georgetown University in Washington <ref> [http://courses.georgetown.edu/index.cfm?Action=View&CourseID=PHIL-180 Georgetown University Course Listing]</ref>
# The Sociology of Hip-Hop: The Odyssey of Jay-Z – Georgetown University <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz1fPkYhzqX Jay-Z's street rhymes a Georgetown college course]</ref>
# Emotional Literacy<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1076368/Schools-councils-waste-300-000-useless-emotional-literacy-course-faraway-island-sun.html</ref>
# Media Genres, the study of zombies - University of Baltimore <ref>[http://www.aolnews.com/weird-news/article/university-of-baltimore-pop-culture-class-focuses-on-zombies/19625044?test=latestnews College Course Preps Pupils for Zombie Apocalypse, AOL News, September 9, 2010]</ref>
# The Science of Superheroes - UC Irvine <ref>[http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/11/14/the-top-8-california-schools-that-are-like-totally-wasting-your-money/ The Top 8 California Schools that Are, Like, Totally Wasting Your Money, NewsRealBlog, November 14, 2010]</ref>
# Field Equipment Operation (tractor driving) - UC Davis
# Hip Hop: The Politics of Culture - UC San Diego
# History of Surfing - UC Santa Barbara
# Labor Studies - UM Saint Louis & UM Kansas City <ref>[http://www.thehotjoints.com/2011/04/25/video-college-course-teaches-violent-union-tactics/ Video: College Course Teaches Violent Union Tactics, The Hot Joints, April 25, 2011]</ref>
# Arguing with Judge Judy - UC Berkeley
# Self-Esteem - Cal State Fresno
# Gaga for Lady Gaga: Sex, Gender, and Identity- University of Virginia-Charlottesville<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/10/lady-gaga-college-class_n_712540.html</ref>
# Pilot Brewery (brewmaster) - UC Davis
# Search for Extraterrestial Intelligence - UC Berkeley
# Ecology of Renewable Natural Resources - Texas Tech University <ref>[http://www.depts.ttu.edu/officialpublications/courses/NRM.php Texas Tech University Course Listing]</ref>
# Introduction to social networking
#The Mythology of Harry Potter-UCLA
#History of Weaving-UC Berkeley
#The Simpsons and the American Family-Hampshire College
#From DNA to Homosapiens - MCLA
#LGBT “Sensitivity Training” - Georgetown University <ref>[http://kiradavis.net/exclusive-georgetown-allegedly-suspends-student-for-refusing-lgbt-training/ Exclusive: Georgetown Allegedly Suspends Student for Refusing LGBT Training, KiraDavis.net, July 23, 2012]</ref>

== External Links ==

*[http://www.bankrate.com/finance/college-finance/graduate-degrees-dont-pay-off.aspx?ec_id=m1117367#slide=1 5 graduate degrees that don't pay off]
*[http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/Unemployment.Final.update1.pdf Unemployment rates and earnings for college majors - Georgetown University report - 2012]
* [http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/whatsitworth-complete.pdf What's It Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors] - Comprehensive report at [[Georgetown University]] website
* [http://learnfinancialplanning.com/best-worst-college-majors-degree/ Best and Worst College Majors]
* [http://www.toptenz.net/to-10-useless-college-classes-degrees.php Top 10 Useless College Degrees & Classes]
* [http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/10-college-majors-lowest-unemployment-rates-163049193.html College majors with lowest unemployment]
[[Category:college]]
[[Category:education]]

== References ==

<references/>

Black Friday

2012-11-24T05:09:21Z

EdgarP:

'''Black Friday''' is the name popularly given to the day after [[Thanksgiving]], which is always a [[Friday]] and is a [[holiday]]. The name "Black Friday" comes from the fact that historically it has been the day when stores break into profitability for the full year, so that they are "in the black" rather than "in the red." In recent years, the day has become the most popular day of the year to go shopping and retailers have reported record [[profit]]s. Many people take advantage of this holiday as an opportunity to do all their [[Christmas]] shopping early. Black Friday is commonly criticized as being an inordinate display of [[consumerism]], though it is often celebrated in the media with previews and discussions on upcoming sales.

Overhype for Black Friday by the [[liberal media]] is causing it to encroach on respect for [[Thanksgiving Day]].

==Black Friday Incidents and Controversies==

Due to the steep price cuts and limited supply of products offered by companies on Black Friday, there are many acts of violence and other incidents that have occurred.

In 2008, Black Friday reached a fever pitch when a Wal-Mart employee was trampled to death and a pregnant woman was injured by a mob of shoppers breaking through the doors shortly before opening time. According to witnesses, the mob actually broke the doors off their hinges, and continued to trample in, even stepping on officers giving CPR to the trampled man. One witness said, "When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling, 'I've been on line since Friday morning!'...They kept shopping."<ref>http://articles.nydailynews.com/2008-11-28/local/17910475_1_wal-mart-worker-long-island-wal-mart-jdimytai-damour/2</ref> A Wal-Mart employee later said, "I look at these people's faces and I keep thinking one of them could have stepped on him. How could you take a man's life to save $20 on a TV?"<ref>http://articles.nydailynews.com/2008-11-28/local/17910475_1_wal-mart-worker-long-island-wal-mart-jdimytai-damour/2</ref>

On the same day, two men at a Toys R Us were killed in a shooting. Though initial reports suggested the shooting erupted over a shopping altercation, this was apparently not the case.<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27957714</ref> The exact cause of the shooting is not clearly known.

In 2012,a man left his girlfriend's two year old in his car so he could pick up a tv, and got a separate ride home; the boy was rescued when K-Mart employees broke into his car<ref>http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/man-leaves-toddler-in-car-while-black-friday-shopping-at-massachussetts-kmart-for-tv</ref>.

Following the outrage sparked over the Wal-Mart incident, Black Friday has slightly declined in popularity, and the term has even been disfavored over other terms that do not have any negative connotation. (Despite some decline in Black Friday shopping, some retailers such as Old Navy recently started offering Thanksgiving ''Day'' sales similar to Black Friday sales.)

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Christmas]]
[[Category:Retail]]

Talk:Liberalism and bestiality

2011-09-28T00:02:36Z

EdgarP: /* Fantastic Article */

Talk:Liberalism and bestiality

2011-09-28T00:02:21Z

EdgarP: /* Fantastic Article */ new section

==Wow, it's going better and better==
70 articles talking about bestiality, and 7 with bestiality in the title! 

Must be the bestiality-expert encyclopedia ! Why not rename it bestialopedia ?--[[User:ARamis|ARamis]] 19:43, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

== Fantastic Article ==

This is a great article and a wonderful addition to an amazing encyclopedia. However, there are several grammar / spelling errors in it, but I can't edit it because it is protected. I'd list the mistakes, but there are unfortunately too many to single out in the talk pages. Could it be temporarily unlocked? -20:02, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

== Fantastic Article ==

This is a great article and a wonderful addition to an amazing encyclopedia. However, there are several grammar / spelling errors in it, but I can't edit it because it is protected. I'd list the mistakes, but there are unfortunately too many to single out in the talk pages. Could it be temporarily unlocked? -20:02, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Liberalism and bestiality

2011-09-28T00:02:21Z

EdgarP: /* Fantastic Article */ new section

Wikipedia

2011-09-23T12:39:17Z

EdgarP:

[[File:Wikipedia-logo.png|right|200px]]

'''Wikipedia''' is [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|a politically left leaning]] online [[encyclopedia]]<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4840340.stm</ref> written and edited by an ''ad hoc'' assemblage of anonymous persons who are mostly, according to the ''Register'' (UK)<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/mar/08/media.comment</ref><ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/</ref>, teenagers and unemployed persons.<ref>[http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/ How the left conquered Wikipedia - Part 1]</ref> However, in 2009, a survey conducted by the Wikipedia Foundation came out concerning the typical Wikipedia editor that declared the average age of an editor is 26.8 years and 87% of the editors are men.<ref>http://gawker.com/5410917/wikipedia-gridlocked-by-wikipedia-nerds</ref> In 2008, the ''American Journalism Review'' declared concerning Wikipedia:
{{cquote|"An even more blunt assessment appears in the encyclopedia's "Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia" posting: "We do not expect you to trust us. It is in the nature of an ever-changing work like Wikipedia that, while some articles are of the highest quality of scholarship, others are admittedly complete rubbish." It also reminds users not to use Wikipedia as a primary source or for making "critical decisions."<ref>http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461</ref>}}

On August 23, 2011, David Swindle published an article at ''[[FrontPage Magazine]]'' detailing how Wikipedia has been taken over by the [[Leftist|political left]] and he cited statistics relating to Wikipedia's articles on [[Anne Coulter]], [[Michael Moore]], [[Glenn Beck]] and [[Keith Olbermann]] which helped demonstrate the Wikipedia has a leftist/[[liberal]] bias plus he discussed the liberal/leftist cultural foundations of Wikipedia.<ref>[http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/ How the left conquered Wikipedia - Part 1]</ref>

For example, Swindle wrote:

"Consider Ann Coulter versus Michael Moore. Coulter’s entry (on August 9, 2011) was 9028 words long.* Of this longer-than-usual entry, 3220 words were devoted to “Controversies and criticism” in which a series of incidents involving Coulter and quotes from her are cited with accompanying condemnations, primarily from her opponents on the Left. That’s 35.6 percent of Coulter’s entry devoted to making her look bad. By contrast, Moore’s entry is 2876 words (the more standard length for entries on political commentators), with 130 devoted to “Controversy.” That’s 4.5% of the word count, a fraction of Coulter’s. Does this mean that an “unbiased” commentator would find Coulter eight times as “controversial” as Moore?"<ref>[http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/ How the left conquered Wikipedia - Part 1]</ref>

The project was initiated by [[atheism|atheists]] and [[entrepreneur]] [[Jimmy Wales]] and the [[agnosticism|agnostic]] [[philosophy]] [[professor]] [[Larry Sanger]] on January 15, 2001.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/lists/288/000092012/</ref> An irony of internet history is that Jimmy Wales, despite being an atheist, refers to himself as Wikipedia's "spiritual leader".<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/09/wikimedia_pron_purge/</ref> Despite its official "neutrality policy," [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|Wikipedia has a strong liberal bias.]] In his article entitled ''Wikipedia lies, slander continue'' [[journalism|journalist]] [[Joseph Farah]] stated Wikipedia "is not only a provider of inaccuracy and bias. It is wholesale purveyor of lies and slander unlike any other the world has ever known."<ref>http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83640</ref> Mr. Farah has repeatedly been the victim of defamation at the Wikipedia website.<ref>http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83640</ref> In December of 2010, [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[JP Holding]] called Wikipedia "the abomination that causes misinformation".<ref>http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikipedia</ref>

Wikipedia has millions of entries on topics ranging from an explanation for "duh"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duh (only after Conservapedia criticized the entry on the English word "duh" did Wikipedia eventually remove it)</ref> to singles by obscure rock bands<ref>such as ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honk_If_You_Love_Fred_Durst Honk If You Love Fred Durst]'' (accessed April 1, 2007)</ref> to arcane British nobility.<ref>Part of the article about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Liddell Henry Liddell], a 19th-century Vice-chancellor of Oxford University and author, includes that his grandfather was the youngest son of the 8th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne, and that his daughter was the child ''Alice in Wonderland'' was written for (accessed April 1, 2007)</ref> There are editions of Wikipedia in 250 languages, and 130 have more than 1000 articles.<ref>[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias List of Wikipedias - Wikimedia], accessed April 1, 2007.</ref> After about four years Wikipedia had about 450,000 entries,<ref>Aaron Weiss, The Unassociated Press, N.Y. Times, Feb. 10, 2005, at G5.</ref> and after six years it had about 1.7 million entries.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics English Wikipedia statistics] accessed April 1, 2007</ref> Four years later this number had more than doubled again: in May 2011, there are more than 3.6 million content pages.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics English Wikipedia statistics] accessed May 6, 2011</ref>

==Origins==
[[Image:Wpp.png|thumb|right|200px|Multilingual Wikipedia Home Page]]
Initially, Wikipedia was hosted on servers operated by Bomis, Inc., a company that also sold pornographic pictures.<ref>Martin Hickman and Genevieve Roberts, "WIKIPEDIA," The Independent (London) p. 12 (Feb 13, 2006)</ref> In 2003, Jimbo Wales founded the Wikimedia Foundation to oversee the day-to-day operations of Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organization that provides support for Wikipedia and other similar projects,<ref>[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home Wikimedia Foundation] accessed April 7, 2007</ref> and also the free MediaWiki software that runs Wikipedia and Conservapedia.<ref>[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki MediaWiki home] accessed April 7, 2007</ref>
== Leftist, utopian roots ==

See also: [[Leftist roots of Wikipedia]]

David Swindle writes at [[FrontPage Magazine]]:
{{cquote|There was not a single ideological vision driving Wikipedia’s founders and core contributors as they launched the project. Jimmy Wales, who would become the face of the project and its “benevolent dictator,” according to Andrew Lih’s ''The Wikipedia Revolution'', is a libertarian and [[Ayn Rand|Ayn Randian]] [[Objectivism|Objectivist]]. Also important in shaping Wikipedia was the so-called “hacker ethos,” the culture that has developed amongst computer programmers over the last 40 years and been shaped by the Left, the counterculture, popular culture, and [[anarchism|anarchist]] thought.

What binds together these ideologies is a [[Utopia|utopian]] ideal that human beings are more prone to [[altruism]] rather than self-interest. In Wikipedia Revolution Wales is quoted as saying, “Generally we find most people out there on the internet are good… It’s one of the wonderful humanitarian discoveries in Wikipeda, that most people only want to help us and build this free nonprofit, charitable resource.” Ward Cunningham was the programmer who created the wiki concept and software. According to Lih, he believed in the Wiki because “People are generally good.”

Lih explains how this philosophy is embedded within Wikipedia’s rules:

A core idea Wikipedia embraced.. was to assume good faith when interacting with others. The guideline promoted optimistic production rather than pessimistic nay-saying, and reads, “Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it; avoid accusing others of harmful motives without particularly strong evidence.

But as it worked out, Wikipedia in practice has strayed from these utopian ideas because of the ease with which political and social bias trumps altruism.

After almost a decade of rapid growth and free-wheeling experimentation the situation at the site by the Summer of 2009 was chaos. Political operatives would sabotage one another in electoral contests by vandalizing pages. More malicious misinformation filtered in freely, with living historical figures accused of involvement in conspiratorial plots.<ref>http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/</ref>}}

==Economics==

Though Wikipedia is non-profit, the [[Wikia]] project of its co-founder is very much for-profit and has raised millions of dollars in investments. Already Wikipedia has been criticized for favoring Wikia. When Wikipedia community voted 61-39% percent to treat all links to other sites equally by removing nofollow (Google-ignored) tags for all of them, the Wikipedia co-founder overruled this decision and Wikipedia now favors Wikia in its treatment of nofollow tags.<ref>http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/28/wikipedia-special-treatment-for-wikia-and-other-wikis/</ref>

''The Register'' said:<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/</ref>
:Wikipedia has tried to balance the Utopian goal of "an encyclopedia anyone can edit" with the more utilitarian goal of "a website anyone would want to read". With over a million articles, and a rulebook almost as dense, Wikipedia has demonstrated an insatiable desire to participate, create lists and generate procedures. The result is a huge silo of recorded trivia, and perhaps the world's largest, most distributed bureaucracy - mostly manned by a casual staff of teenagers and the unemployed.

==Quality==
''In other words—and this is the rock-solid principle on which the whole of the Corporation’s Galaxywide success is founded—their fundamental design flaws are completely hidden by their superficial design flaws.''
—Douglas Adams

Wikipedia, which is written by anyone, still struggles to solve the need for traditional quality controls characteristic of conventional [[encyclopedia]]s. The self-policing practices has produced results and accuracy far better than originally expected. But still the lack of consistency and uniform supervision leaves an ever present shadow over any given piece of information. It has come to receive high grades for accuracy, but still many in the [[academy]] insist that it is unreliable source for [[research]] and an unacceptable reference in many classrooms. Perhaps these reactions are inevitable. Nevertheless, Wikipedia steers people to original [[source material]], and with the use of [[hyperlink]]s and [[search engine]]s, it has become the most widely used intermediary [[reference]] tool on the [[Internet]].

==[[Liberal bias]]==

''See also:'' [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]]

Wikipedia shows a systematic bias in that tiny proportion of articles which treat controversial issues. It ignores its own [[NPOV]] policy when it allows contributors to "delete well-referenced information" merely because it comes from a [[scientist]] who holds a [[minority view]]. It would only be a violation, if the article used the information to give a false impression of the proportion of scientists adhering to that view, but liberals use "[[undue weight]]" like a sledge hammer. They are either unaware or unconcerned about their bias.

This is not surprising, given this [[Zogby]] poll:

While 97% of [[Republican]]s surveyed said the media are [[liberal]], two-thirds of [[political independent]]s feel the same, but fewer than one in four independents (23%) said they saw a "conservative bias". [[Democrat]]s, while much more likely to perceive a conservative bias than other groups, were not nearly as sure the [[media]] was against them as were the Republicans. While Republicans were unified in their perception of a [[left-wing]] media, just two-thirds of Democrats were certain the media skewed [[right-wing|right]] – and 17% said the bias favored the left.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1262

==Scandals and decline==

[[Image:Wikipedia scandals.jpg|thumb|450px|right|Decline in Wikimedia Foundation donations.<ref>[http://centiare.com/Wikipedia_scandals Wikipedia scandals]. Retrieved from centiare.com October 10, 2007.</ref> Graph courtesy [http://www.centiare.com/Directory:Gregory_J._Kohs Gregory Kohs]. Used with Permission.]]The cumulative effect of multiple scandals and revelations has led to declining activity on the English Wikipedia. The rate of new account creation peaked in early 2007 and has declined ~30% since. Overall editing activity showed a steady decline beginning in February 2007. An independent analysis reported, "The rate at which edits were being made to Wikipedia articles appears to have peaked in February to April 2007 and declined since. This decline is unprecedented in Wikipedia's history.... Though it may be purely coincidental, this time frame also corresponds to the Essjay controversy appearing in the press."<ref>[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-October/033661.html Statistical Decline of the English Wikipedia], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Log_analysis Dragons flight/Log analysis], October 9, 2007.</ref>

Even after the hoax was revealed of high level intimates promoted by the Wikimedia Foundation as experts in fields that they were not, to persuade college professors to allow students to cite Wikipedia as a reliable source, and entrusted with the ability to invade users privacy which could affect, in their words, "life and death," Wikipedia still appealed to students with a Jim and Tammy Faye Baker-style fundraising slogan across one million project space pages that read, "OMG! Wikipedia is gone! I’ll flunk my exams!" [http://whygive.wikimedia.org/2007/11/24/omg-wikipedia-is-gone-ill-flunk-my-exams/]

==False claim about Brent Bozell==

In March 2007, Brent Bozell described this falsehood in Wikipedia:<ref>http://www.creators.com/opinion/brent-bozell/not-your-father-s-encyclopedia.html</ref>

:The other day, Bernie Goldberg emailed me, upset. He pointed me to his Wikipedia entry. To read what was written was to conclude that apparently I must hate his guts. But we are friends. He is a man for whom I have profound respect, professional and personal. He knew there was foul play.

:Right there on the screen, under the heading "Criticism," it stated that I had attacked him, "claiming that Goldberg merely lifted material he had been producing for years, and only published the book because he had an ax to grind with his former employers and was attempting to make a 'quick buck,' noting that Goldberg never mentioned the alleged liberal bias of the media until it was 'convenient' and 'profitable' for him to do so." ...

:In fact, those words have never been uttered by me. The accusation would be false. Back in 1996, Goldberg used the op-ed pages of The Wall Street Journal publicly to castigate his own network for its one-sided oafish bashing of Steve Forbes. It was anything but "convenient" or "profitable" for him. It ruined his friendship with Dan Rather and put him on a path to the outer fringes of CBS "News. Ultimately, it ruined his newscaster career.

:My attorney contacted Wikipedia by email demanding the removal of this false entry. No response. So we edited out the offensive material ourselves, after which in writing counsel alerted Wikipedia to the legal action that might befall them should this be repeated. Here's full disclosure, Wikipedia-style: You can see how each article is altered, sometimes hour by hour, in its "History" section. But there is no mention of the attorney's complaints. In the Goldberg article's history, an editor simply now scolds: "Bozell's article is a mock-jealous swipe at Goldberg's opportunism. PLEASE REREAD IT." (Capitals theirs.)

:Goldberg and I are not alone. The website Conservapedia.com has a [[Bias in Wikipedia|long list]] of 41 allegations of bias and factual errors at Wikipedia. You can add to that the problem with the credentials of its staff. One of its editors, named only "Essjay" online and described on his user profile "as a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law," was recently exposed as a 24-year-old college kid in Kentucky. He resigned in disgrace — even though Wikipedia tried to retain him, claiming he'd edited thousands of articles with flair.

Instead of apologizing to Brent Bozell, '''Wikipedia instead says "Bozell points to Conservapedia as a resource that documents Wikipedia's faults in this regard, presumably holding it as a more authoritative reference less vulnerable to vandalism."'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Bozell accessed April 1, 2007</ref>

==Rewriting its own history==

The Associated Press and others credit Larry Sanger as the co-founder of Wikipedia.<ref>http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/tech/2007/mar/25/032502465.html
</ref> But the Associated Press quotes Jimmy Wales as denying it:<ref>''id.''</ref>

:"When you write this up please do not uncritically repeat Sanger's absurd claim to be the co-founder of Wikipedia."

:"I know of no one who was there at the company at the beginning who would think it anything other than laughable," he added. This is an interesting comment, considering that Larry Sanger takes credit for coining the name, "Wikipedia."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_20#Sorry.2C_Jimbo.2C_but_not_buying_it. User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 20, Larry Sanger 03:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)]</ref>

:"I am not bent out of shape about it," he wrote. "The facts are on my side, which is why I bother so little about it."

According to the Associated Press, Jimmy Wales "has repeatedly tried to address this - even going so far as editing his own Wikipedia biography to tone down credit for Sanger. Such autobiographical contributions are frowned upon in Wikipedia's community, and Wales apologized after his changes were noticed and publicized by blogger Rogers Cadenhead in 2005."<ref>''id.''</ref>

Jimmy Wales has admitted that certain administrators, contrary to their own rules, have at times completely removed editing evidence.

== Seigenthaler scandal ==

In early October 2005 a prominent and respected journalist [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]], contacted Wikipedia founder [[Jimmy Wales]] about false and libelous content in his biographical entry. Essjay, a 24 year old Wikipedia Administrator who was advancing rapidly in the organization, was dispatched to handle the situation.<ref>[http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=User:Essjay/Letter User:Essjay/Letter]. Retrieved from WikiTruth, November 3, 2007.</ref> An anonymous contributor added to Seigenthaler's biography the previous May,
:"John Seigenthaler Sr. was the assistant to Attorney General [[Robert Kennedy]] in the early 1960s. For a short time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both [[John F. Kennedy|John]], and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven," and "John Seigenthaler moved to the [[Soviet Union]] in 1971, and returned to the [[United States]] in 1984. He started one of the country's largest public relations firms shortly thereafter."

Wales told Seignethaler that Wikipedia is "accountable" and corrects mistakes immediately, but that the internet service provider of the anonymous user probably would not be helpful in identifying who placed the content.<ref>[http://www.journalism.org/node/1673 Seigenthaler's Op-Eds], October 1, 2005. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org November 12, 2007.</ref> Accountability activist Daniel Brandt, a victim of a spurious biographical entry by Wikipedia Administrators, identified the place of employment of the anonymous user, and from there the person accountable was identified.<ref>http://www.journalism.cf.ac.uk/2006/online/index.php?id=parse-195-0-0-251&article=336&author=India+Camm</ref>

Seigenthaler returned to the editorial pages of ''USA Today'' from which he retired as its first editorial manager to write an Op-Ed piece critical of Wikipedia and the threat it poses to free speech due of its overt provocation of government regulation, its irresponsible self regulation and lack of accountability.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm A false Wikipedia 'biography'], By John Seigenthaler, ''USA Today'', 11/29/2005.</ref>

=== CNN interview ===

On December 5, 2005 Wales and Seigenthaler appeared on [[CNN]]. An exchange between CNN moderator [[Kyra Phillips]] and Wales went like this:
{{Cquote|PHILLIPS:...I ran my name. I was shocked to see what was under my name. ...I'm telling you right now, Jimmy, that's not how I want people to see me and understand me. And what I'm about and what I write about in my interviews, et cetera. So, you know, it's not just individuals like John, but me and many other people, that just have concerns that this is creating gossip that can be very harmful. And people go to these sites thinking that this is the truth.}}
{{Cquote|WALES: Well, I mean, I think the real key is that the site matures over time, the -- all of the articles are edited over and over and over, and improved. Anyone's free to contribute. You're free to go and contribute.}}

This in fact is not the case. Phillips was not free to remove objectionable content within her biographical entry, as Daniel Brandt at that exact moment was discovering. Not four days prior, Wales told ''Editor & Publisher'' magazine regarding Brandt's objections to a false Wikipedia biography created by Wikipedia Administrators about him, "I find it hard to take him very seriously at all," and libelous slanders remained in Brandt's biography for a year and half. Wales told CNN, "we are very, very responsive to complaints and concerns."

Seigenthaler told the audience "with accountability comes credibility" and expressed fear that, "I'm afraid we're going to get regulated media as a result."<ref>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/05/lol.02.html</ref>

On December 9, Seigenthaler appeared on C-SPAN's ''Washington Journal'' with Brian Lamb and articulated his concern that members of Congress or other powerful figures in government may likewise be targeted. On November 2, 2006, days before the mid-term Congressional elections, an anonymous IP address traced to the ''[[New York Times]]'' changed [[U.S. House of Representatives]] [[Majority Leader]] [[Tom DeLay]]'s Wikipedia biographical entry from "a prominent member of the [[Republican Party]]" to "Grand Dragon of the Republican Party."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_DeLay&diff=prev&oldid=85320018 Wikipedia/Tom DeLay, Revision as of 20:19, 2 November 2006, IP 199.181.174.146]</ref><ref>[http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/name2ip.php?orgname=New+York+Times&location= WikiScanner]</ref>

Seigenthaler wrote a more expansive column in the ''The Tennessean'' after the November 30 ''USA Today'' piece appeared,
{{Cquote|a sudden stream of invective — homophobic, anti-Semitic and racist — spilled, as if from a sewer, onto the Wikipedia page under my name. ..It identified me as ...a "Nazi," "fascist-oriented" ....murderer ...there also was the profile picture of Adolf Hitler over the caption, "Press photo of Seigenthaler." The accompanying line: "He is secretly responsible for killing all the Jews." }}

=== Accountability and Section 230 ===
[[Image:Wikifascists.JPG|thumb|275px|right|From Wikipedia Watch. [http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/] The inscription reads, ''"Two wikifascists find someone without a biography."'']]
Upon his retirement from ''USA Today'', Seigenthaler founded of the First Amendment Center, an organization dedicated to a national dialogue about [[First Amendment]] rights and values. Seigenthaler criticized passage of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Section 230 states that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker." Unlike print and broadcast companies, internet service providers (ISP's) cannot be sued for disseminating defamatory attacks on citizens posted by others. Seigenthaler noted [[Jimbo Wales]] told [[Brian Lamb]] in a [[C-Span]] interview that Wikipedia is accountable and that mistakes are corrected within minutes, but the false information remained in Seigenthaler's biography for five months. Seigenthaler concluded,
{{Cquote|And so we live in a universe of new media with phenomenal opportunities for worldwide communications and research — but populated by volunteer vandals with poison-pen intellects.<ref>A false Wikipedia 'biography', By John Seigenthaler, ''USA Today'', 11/29/2005.</ref>}}

In the case of ''Zeran v. AOL'', Zeran sued AOL for refusing to screen and remove defamatory messages, even after Zeran notified the ISP of their existence. The lower court ruled for the service provider and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision, noting that the intent of Section 230 was to (1) remove incentives on service providers to restrict speech on the Internet and (2) encourage self regulation by service providers.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916529</ref><ref>http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/newcyber.pdf</ref>

An American citizen who posts material on the Internet that is illegal in a foreign country could be prosecuted if he subjected himself to the jurisdiction of that country. Internet users who export material that is illegal, that is to say, post material that is accessible and illegal in some foreign countries may be subject to prosecution in that country. However, under American law, the United States will not extradite a person for engaging in a constitutionally protected activity even if that activity violates a criminal law elsewhere.<ref>http://www.rjayco.com/obrien/nazism.pdf</ref>

=== Essjay given oversight ===
:''See Main article: [[Wikipedia:The Essjay scandal]]

Essjay wrote a professor to persuade her to allow her students to use Wikipedia as a viable source of information and posted a verbatim copy of the email for others to use. Essjay stated, "I was the administrator who deleted the inappropriate revisions when Mr. Seigenthaler contacted our founder, [[Jimmy Wales]]; it is quite unfortunate that a relatively minor issue on a relatively minor figure has provided so much negative publicity.<ref>[http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=User:Essjay/Letter User:Essjay/Letter]. Retrieved from WikiTruth, November 3, 2007.</ref> Seigenthaler noted in his Op-Ed piece, "The motive for the salacious stuff directed at me is reasonably obvious," and quoted some comments, "We all at Wikipedia think he (Seigenthaler) is a horrible, stupid p...k for complaining about small inaccuracies in his biography."<ref>[http://www.journalism.org/node/1673 Seigenthaler's Op-Eds], October 1, 2005. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org November 12, 2007.</ref>

Others said, "Mr. Seigenthaler's attitude and actions are reprehensible and ill-formed," and “if there is an error whether large or small, he can correct it.” This again, was not true. Even prior to the Wikipedia policy, '''Biographies of Living Persons''', [[conflict of interest]] restrictions existed on the subject of an article editing their own entry. Another wrote: "Rather than fixing the article himself, he made a legal threat."<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/02/12/bias_sabotage_haunt_wikipedias_free_world/?page=3</ref>
[[Image:Seigraph.gif|400px|thumb|right|The Seigenthaler scandal was viewed as "the best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia" as curiosity seekers to view the [[misinformation]] skyrocketed Alexa rankings.]]
Despite the damage to an innocent person and divulgence of Wikipedia's precarious claim as a viable source, the Seigenthaler scandal was viewed as a triumph and considered "the best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia,"<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Seigenthaler,_Sr.#The_best_thing_that_ever_happened_to_Wikipedia Talk:John Seigenthaler Sr.#The best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia], retrieved 23 March 2007.</ref> catapulting it into a top ten most visited website as curiosity seekers responded to the negative publicity.<ref>[http://wikipediareview.com/lofiversion/index.php?t1100.html Wikipedia: A Nightmare Of Libel and Slander], Joel Leyden, Israel News Agency, 8 May 2006.</ref>

The scandal was originally billed as a "hoax", then "controversy," then downgraded to "incident," and now re-upgraded to "controversy," evidently in response to criticism. The Wikipedia entry on "Seigenthaler controversy" contains [[disinformation]], making the claim, "After the incident, Wikipedia took steps to prevent a recurrence, including barring unregistered users from creating new pages." No actions were ever taken to require disclosure of the real life identities of contributors. Barring unregistered users from creating new pages had nothing to do with the Seigenthaler scandal--the page already existed when an anonymous IP added the false information. Registration of accounts requires no accountability of the real life identity of the contributor. Indeed many experienced Wikipedia editors and Administrators have dozens of registered accounts, called "sockpuppet accounts." Protecting the identities of anonymous high-level Administrators has always been more of a priority to the WikiMedia Foundation than the propagation of false information about real life persons whose identities are known. Wales was asked by ''BusinessWeek'' magazine, “Why do you feel it is important to allow contributors and site administrators to remain anonymous?” Wales responded, “there are definitely people working in Wikipedia who may have privacy reasons for not wanting their name on the site….there are lots of reasons for privacy online that aren’t nefarious.”<ref> http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051214_441708.htm</ref> In the Seigenthaler case, it was the odd circumstance that a victim of false information had a large enough platform to respond, coupled with the welcome fact that the victim fundamentally opposes government regulation of internet speech.

Wikipedia's "Seigenthaler controversy" also states, "The Foundation added a new level of "oversight" features to the MediaWiki software,[12] accessible as of 2006 to around 20 experienced editors nominated by Wales,"<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Seigenthaler_Sr._Wikipedia_biography_controversy#Wikimedia_Foundation_reaction Seigenthaler controversy#Wikimedia Foundation reaction].</ref> one of whom was Essjay.

This ban on anonymous page creation “reform” was abandoned less than two years later as Wikipedia's usage and ratings slumped in the wake of yet more scandals and questions about Wikipedia's culture, core content policies, and endemic lack of accountability.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/084292.html</ref>

==Brandt / Berlet feud==
:''See Main article: [[Wikipedia:The Daniel Brandt controversy]]
An ugly far-left sectarian dispute<ref>[http://spencer.lib.ku.edu/exhibits/wilcox/5.html Laird Wilcox], ''The Watchdogs: A Close Look at Anti-Racist "Watchdog" Groups'', Second Edition, Part 2, Editorial Research Service, 1999, p. 21. ISBN 0-993592-96-5.</ref> reared its head in 2005 with disastrous consequences for the site's credibility. The feud had been dormant for many years until the need to elevate a “controversial and notable expert” above the level of “partisan and extreme” defined by its own policies became apparent which would have precluded the so-called “expert” as "a source for anything other than himself,” as Wikipedia's ever fluid policies dictate.

Daniel Brandt, founder of Namebase,<ref>http://www.namebase.org/</ref> Google Watch, and Wikipedia Watch, removed [[Chip Berlet]] from his Board of Advisors in 1991 when Berlet refused to sit on the same Board which included Fletcher Prouty." Prouty, a retired Air Force colonel whose intelligence career stretched back to accompanying President [[Franklin Roosevelt]] to the [[Teheran conference]], was allegorically portrayed as the mysterious “Man X”<ref>[http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/lfprouty.htm Leroy Fletcher Prouty, Jr., Colonel, United States Air Force], [[Arlington National Cemetery]] Website, Retrieved November 4, 2007.</ref> by [[Donald Southerland]] in [[Oliver Stone]]'s film, [[JFK]]. A Brandt biographical page was created using Berlet as the source for unsavory attacks on Brandt. Brandt describes himself as an "accountability activist"<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/04/your_take_roundupbelievers_neg.html Believers, Negativists Debate Wikipedia’s Trustworthiness], by Mark Glaser, 20 April 2006. Retrieved from pbs.org October 29, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Brandt Wikiquote/Daniel Brandt#Sourced]</ref> and claims he originally began working with Wikipedia editors in good faith during October 2005 but any biographical information he revealed was spun against him to depict him in a negative light. Brandt states,
{{Cquote|I soon realized that it was also about Berlet, who was still bent on undermining me. Berlet was using Wikipedia as part of his political agenda, and he was successful in this.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&pid=21441&mode=threaded&show=&st=0&#entry21441</ref>}}
Berlet's biography underwent an extensive revision with most of the substantive NPOV criticism cut out. The revising editor commented, "I kept Daniel Brandt, not because I feel he's a credible source, but because there's so little published criticism of Berlet, that I felt I had to retain something."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=prev&oldid=9161554 Chip Berlet/Talk, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 January 2005].</ref> This is an extraordinary statement and raises the question why the same high-level Administrator and author of several of Wikipedia's core content and citation policies, including '''Wikipedia:Reliable Sources''' and '''Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons''' ('''BLP'''),<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=31947681&oldid=31753956</ref> would use a source she did not consider credible.

===Biographies of living persons===

Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons (WP:BLP) policy did not come into being because of the [[Seigenthaler scandal]], but rather over the Brandt controversy, as the originating editor noted in an edit summary.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=31947681&oldid=31753956</ref> Brandt requested Wikipedia delete his biographical entry, and ceased working with editors he suspected of working to further the propagation of false information about him.

''Editor & Publisher'' magazine bills itself as the nation’s oldest trade journal serving the newspaper industry with roots dating back to 1884. Wikipedia founder [[Jimmy Wales]] responded to questions from ''Editor & Publisher'' in a prepared statement on December 1, 2005 about Daniel Brandt saying,
{{Cquote|I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all<ref>[http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/article_brief/eandp/1/1001612839 Wikipedia Founder, Readers Respond to Seigenthaler Article], Jay DeFoore, ''Editor & Publisher'', December 01, 2005.</ref>}}

Wales comments added '''undue weight'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:UNDUE#Undue_weight</ref> ('''WP:UNDUE''') to criticism of Brandt when placed within his biographical entry. Brandt demanded accountability from the army of unidentified Wikipedia Administrators furthering [[Chip Berlet]]'s agenda to destroy Brandt's credibility, and elevate Berlet's own as a Wikipedia "expert."
[[Image:294577483 90fd22f5cd m.jpg|thumb|300px|right|From '''WikiTruth''', the inscription reads, 
"''The Big Bad Brandt is Gonna Getcha!'']]
Brandt became known as the scourge of the Wikipedia Admin community. WikiTruth says in its ''Brandt the Boogeyman'' entry,
{{Cquote|he dates back to a time when people would look up facts in books and would verify information without just doing a copy and paste from an AP news article and thinking they were done. He compares writing styles, he calls government agencies, and he writes letters. And when he's done, he tends to know. Or at least, he knows where he stands in terms of information. He's rather tenacious about getting stuff right.

Wikipedia, of course, doesn't do this much at all: depending on the day, they'll laud a link to a website as being absolutely useless (it's on the WEB, of course) and then the next minute link to a different website to back a "fact" up. Citing books and printed materials is often a no-go, because nobody can read the original citation, so it gets swept away as well. Really, you have no idea what's good and what's bad, and it's all one big happy soup-hug.

Therefore, guys like Daniel Brandt are horrible for Wikipedia: he researches. He finds laws that pertain to situations. He asks the tough questions that could upset the whole Wiki-cart.}}

==The Wordbomb Saga==
[[Image:Patrick byrne overstock small.jpg|thumb|right|Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne [http://www.overstock.com/Patrick-Byrne-and-naked-short-selling/7371/static.html]]]
One of Wikipedia’s most bitter and drawn-out disputes, chronicled in ''The Register,''<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/</ref> centers around the assertion by representatives of Overstock.com<ref>http://www.overstock.com/community</ref> that a [[Mainstream media|mainstream financial journalist]] Gary Weiss had been editing Wikipedia to impose his point of view on a series of articles relevant to the company. Weiss was once a reporter with BusinessWeek, in 2007 became a columnist with Forbes, and had for over 10 years been posting under fake names to confuse, distort, hijack Usenet groups, stock message boards, and Wikipedia, to prevent the public from understanding criminal activity.<ref>http://www.deepcapture.com/gary-weiss-scaramouch-psychopath/</ref> Weiss was notorious around the Internet for his public feud with Overstock<ref>http://garyweiss.blogspot.com/2007/05/overstockcoms-ethical-dilemma.html</ref> and its CEO Patrick Byrne,<ref>http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/22/patrick-byrne-vindicated/</ref> ridiculing their campaign against the controversial practice of [[Naked Short Selling]].

In 2006, Judd Bagley, an ally of Overstock’s Patrick Byrne having interviewed the CEO for a personal project, began editing Wikipedia to counter what was perceived to be a skewed representation of Naked Short Selling and Overstock.com. He was swiftly dispatched by influential Wikipedia administrators.

Shortly after, Bagley became Overstock’s Director of Communications, and embarked on an aggressive campaign to publicize the dispute on various websites, aiming to expose the administrators he held responsible for protecting Weiss. Using the moniker “Wordbomb”, Bagley presented evidence<ref>http://antisocialmedia.net/final-word-on-weiss/</ref> suggesting that not only was Gary Weiss editing Wikipedia using the name “User:Mantanmoreland“,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mantanmoreland</ref> but that he was operating other accounts to manipulate consensus and protect his interests in the dispute. Mantanmoreland violated Wikipedia policies against Conflict of Interest and No Self Promotion by creating an article about himself.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=48341962</ref> Bagley proved Weiss had edited Wikipedia from one of two main IPs used by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC),<ref>http://www.dtcc.com/about/business/index.php</ref> the organization charged with settling about a quadrillion stock trades each year. The DTCC is also the organization Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne said acts an enabler of perpetrators of illegal naked short selling of many public companies.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=10360&view=findpost&p=36485</ref>

Wikipedia responded to Bagley’s campaign in typical schoolyard fashion. The dispute was escalated by a small clique of powerful Wikipedians who seemed less interested in the truth of Bagley’s assertions, and more concerned with attacking perceived threats to the status quo at Wikipedia. With the approval of [[Jimbo Wales]], administrators sided with “Mantanmoreland” / Gary Weiss, and anointed Bagley / Wordbomb an “Enemy Of The Wiki” who needed to be silenced — a “stalker” and a “harasser” for publicizing the details of the person who had been editing relevant articles on Wikipedia, and the people who had been stopping him from doing the same.

For nearly two years, Bagley’s name was invoked to inspire paranoia in the Wikipedia Admin Community to keep questioning editors in line. It became a textbook case for analysis of the intense group-think Wikipedia has become notorious for.
[[Image:Judd bagley overstock.jpg|thumb|left|175px|Judd Bagley was made a target at the highest levels of Wikipedia and became a victim of a global [[witchhunt]] by the Wikipedia Admin Community for daring to expose an unholy alliance of abuse and [[corruption]] on [[Wall Street]] and in the Wikipedia cabal. [http://antisocialmedia.net/] ]]
Bagley was repeatedly disparaged<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15897</ref> by a cabal of out-of-control administrators such as Guy Chapman, who denounced Bagley as “lunatic” and “evil” when it suited. UK Wikimedia representative David Gerard banned an entire area of Utah to prevent Bagley raising his issues and made personally disparaging remarks.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:David_Gerard/archive_5#User:204.15.84.2</ref> Wikipedia Arbitrator Fred Bauder claimed that Bagley’s blog AntiSocialMedia.net showed “moral depravity”<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Proposed_decision&diff=158954587&oldid=158809362</ref> for challenging the Wiki-elite. Administrator Phil Sandifer dismissed Bagley in highly personal and offensive language while boasting<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/083509.html</ref> that he himself had become a “powerful and trusted administrator on the 9th biggest website in the world.”

Other editors who raised Overstock’s quite legitimate complaints were banned as proxies of Judd Bagley. Paranoia had taken such a hold that editors with productive records from all over the US, and as far afield as Europe and Asia found themselves accused of being Bagley. When the editor Cla68<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Cla68</ref> questioned the issue of Gary Weiss editing Wikipedia, he was swiftly blocked by administrator Durova on the orders of Jimbo Wales who wrote,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gary_Weiss&diff=165916446&oldid=165916313</ref> “Durova and Guy have my full support here. No nonsense, zero tolerance, shoot on sight. No kidding, this has gone on long enough”.

A study<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzie/Investigation</ref> undertaken by concerned administrators into the editing patterns of “Mantanmoreland” came to fruition. Despite the “Mantanmoreland” account ceasing edits on Overstock / Naked Short Selling articles in September 2007, the study revealed evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the same person had been operating several accounts to “control” articles. Thus affirming Bagley’s claims.

More worryingly for good faith Wikipedians was the revelation<ref>http://www.wikback.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2762#Post2757</ref><ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/01/wikipedia_and_naked_shorting/print.html</ref> that [[Jimbo Wales]], alongside leading administrators, had considered that this person was almost certainly Gary Weiss in a private discussion as long ago as September 2007 (the same month the “Mantanmoreland” account quit editing the relevant articles). Meaning that behind the scenes, they were admitting that Bagley was probably right all along, yet in public were vilifying or blocking anyone who publicly stated so.

After the [[financial meltdown of 2008]], the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]] issued directives aimed at curbing abusive naked short selling.<ref>[http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/20090728_SEC_short-selling_rule_is_permanent.html]</ref> Patrick Byrne has been widely recognized as in the forefront of the movement aimed at curbing such abuses.<ref>http://www.investigatethesec.com/drupal-5.5/?q=node/425</ref>

==Michael Moore==
[[Image:Moorecagan.JPG|right|thumb|200px|Moore with [[Leslie Cagan]] [[United For Peace and Justice]] [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=629] ]]
The website MichaelMoore.com, dissatisfied with a Wikipedia editor's edits to ''[[Sicko]]'', published an image of a Wikipedia user on its main page. This was combined with links to edit both ''Sicko'' and the editor's user page.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Proposed_decision#Michael_Moore] Several Wikipedia editors and Administrators regarded this action on the part of [[Michael Moore]]'s official website as an egregious violation of a well publicized ruling to protect Wikipedia editors from outside harassment. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence#Michael_Moore][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence#Michael_Moore_2] The consensus, per Wikipedia's policy was to remove links from Wikipedia to Michael Moore's attack site which was urging vengeance and reprisals against an editor who posted criticism of Moore's film.

In Arbitration, Wikipedia's internal policy making and dispute resolution arm, the Arbitration chairman publicly admitted,
{{Cquote|No question it contained an attack, including a link to edit our user's page. The problem is that many of us like Michael Moore very much and don't care much for the viewpoint of the user involved. Applying our policy in a rote manner (Without consideration of '''the unwritten rule that we support prominent subjects that we like''') yields removal of the link (At least while it contained the personal attack).<ref>Wikien-1 [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082980.html Harassment sites], Fred Bauder, Sun Oct 14 19:03:28 UTC 2007.</ref>}}

Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV), laid down by founder [[Jimbo Wales]] allegedly is "absolute and non-negotiable."[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#_note-0] The ArbCom chairman further stated, "Obviously we need to make an exception for prominent people whose viewpoint we support." [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082987.html] When asked, "How, then, is this remotely compatible with NPOV?", the ArbCom chairman responded, "Not at all." [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082993.html] The editor whom Michaelmoore.com was urging its viewers to attack and harass is described as "a Fellow at the [[American Enterprise Institute]], a [[conservative]] [[think tank]]."[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/083230.html]

==Sinbad hoax==
On March 16 2007, Wikipedia entry on the 50-year old entertainer Sinbad, born David Adkins, states: "He succumbed to a fatal heart attack on the morning of March, 14, 2007." This hoax was widely reported in the media<ref>http://www.ioltechnology.co.za/article_page.php?iSectionId=2891&iArticleId=3734818</ref>.

==Rutgers-Ivy League hoax==
A Wikipedia entry falsely stated that Rutgers was once invited to join the Ivy League. Although that false statement was eventually removed from Wikipedia, it was not removed before the ''Daily News'' relied on it in this story:

:You don't have to define your college with your football team, but Rutgers long ago decided to give it a try. Back in 1954, when it was considered a 'public Ivy,' Rutgers might have joined the fledgling Ivy League and altered its destiny. But the school declined the offer - arguably the dumbest mistake in its history. Ever since then, Rutgers has scrambled to prove itself worthy of playing football with the big boys."<ref>Bondy, Filip. "They Can Finally Say They Belong Here", New York Daily News, 2006-11-10, p. 92. Retrieved on 2006-12-13.</ref>

==Barbara Bauer vs. Wikimedia Foundation==
Wikimedia Foundation is one of 17 defendants in a lawsuit suit filed in New Jersey, by Barbara Bauer and her literary agency. Her Wikipedia article was deleted on March 25, 2007 by Wikipedia administrator Doc Glasgow as a "bloody disgrace".<ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauertc.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauertc.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert1.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert2.html</ref>

==GFDL License Issue==
Wikipedia's practice of complete deletion of articles<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Brian+Peppers</ref> without reference to the original article, the author(s)/publisher(s) of the article, and the history and title(s) of the article, including modification history, description and appropriate dates, is a direct violation of at least GFDL version 1.2. Additionally, the GFDL License states that if the article/document contains Copyright notices, that said notices must be preserved at all times. If those notices are removed, then they are in violation of Copyright Law, as well as the terms of the GFDL license. Furthermore, the question of them removing anything outright at all comes into quite a grey area. If one reads the GFDL License literally, then it implies that once the article document is posted, it is in distribution, and technical measures are not allowed to be taken to prevent the use of the document in question, and that no other conditions whatsoever can be added by you to those of the GFDL license.<ref>http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Wikipocalypse:GF'DL</ref><ref>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html#TOC1</ref>

== Humorous quotes concerning Wikipedia ==

''See also:'' [[Essay: 10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd|10 telltale signs you are on your way to becoming an atheist nerd]] - [[satire]]

An article entitled ''Wikipedia Gridlocked by Wikipedia Nerds'' declared:
{{Cquote|So who are these Gatekeepers to all the internet's knowledge?

A survey the foundation conducted last year determined that the average age of an editor is 26.8 years, and that 87% of them are men.

As you suspected: [[nerd]]s.<ref>http://gawker.com/5410917/wikipedia-gridlocked-by-wikipedia-nerds</ref>}}

[[Jimmy Wales]] said the typical profile of a Wikipedia contributor is "a 26-year-old geeky male" who moves on to other ventures, gets married and leaves the website.<ref>[http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/5397593/Wikipedia-losing-contributors-founder-says Wikipedia losing contributors, founder says]</ref>

=== Song excerpt ===

{{Cquote|All of my action figures are Cherry,
[[Stephen Hawking]]'s in my library....

I edit Wikipedia...I'm nerdy in the extreme,
whiter than sour cream...

They see me strollin', they're laughin'
And rollin' their eyes cause I'm so
White and nerdy". - ''White and Nerdy'', Weird Al Yankovic<ref>http://www.musiclyricsfyi.com/white-nerdy-lyrics.htm</ref>}}

==See also ==
*[[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedia and atheism]]
*[[Previous Breaking News/Wikipedia|Articles about '''Wikipedia''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Essay:The Protocols of Ritual Defamation]]
*[[Wikipedia prejudice and KAL 007]] (Wikipedia deletion material related to [[New World Order]] and [[Larry McDonald]], touching [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]])

==Further reading==
*[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/21/conservatives-miss-wikipedias-threat/ SHEFFIELD: Conservatives miss Wikipedia's threat] by [[Washington Times]], August 21, 2008
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/print.html Wikipedia black helicopters circle Utah's Traverse Mountain], By Cade Metz, ''The Register'', 6th December 2007.
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/15/wikipedia_can_damage_your_grades/ Avoid Wikipedia, warns Wikipedia chief - It can seriously damage your grades] by Andrew Orlowski, ''The Register'', June 15, 2006
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/18/wikipedia_quality_problem/ Wikipedia founder admits to serious quality problems] by Andrew Orlowski, ''The Register'', October 18, 2005
*[http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia Who Writes Wikipedia?] by Aaron Swartz, 2006

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

==External links==
*[http://www.wikipedia.org Wikipedia]
*[http://www.wikitruth.info/ Wikitruth]
*[http://www.citizendium.com Citizendium(Beta)]
*[http://www.wikipedia-watch.org Wikipedia Watch]
*[http://wikipediareview.com/ Wikipedia Review]
*[http://www.mises.org/story/2704 Wikipedia: What Is It Good For?], By Dick Clark, 9/19/2007. Retrieved from The Ludwig von Mises Institute, http://www.mises.org/ November 5, 2007.
{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category:Encyclopedias]]

Michele Bachmann

2011-09-13T18:37:48Z

EdgarP:

{{Officeholder
|name=Michele Bachmann
|image=Michele Bachmann.jpg
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=Marcus Bachmann
|religion= Non-Denominational Christian
(Was formerly a member of the [[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]])<REF>[http://www.christianpost.com/news/michele-bachmann-leaves-church-gets-catholic-support-52384/ Bachmann leaves church] Anugrah Kumar, The Christian Post, 27 July 2011</REF>
|offices=
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=Minnesota
|district=6th
|terms=January 4, 2007 – Present
|preceded=Mark Kennedy
|former=
|succeeded=
}}
}}

'''Michele M. Bachmann''', born April 6, 1956 (age {{age|1956|04|06}}), is a [[conservative]] and the first [[Republican Party|Republican]] woman to be elected to the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] from [[Minnesota]]. She represents the 6th District of Minnesota.

A [[movement conservative]], Michele Bachmann defeated a massive attempt by [[liberals]] to unseat her in 2008 and 2010. Prior to her election to [[Congress]], she served in the Minnesota state [[legislature]] since first being elected there in 2000 as a check against the leftists then encroaching on Minnesota's freedoms.

Michele Bachmann, an [[attorney]], is a former tax litigator. She has five [[children]] and has also opened her home to 23 foster children.<ref>http://bachmann.house.gov/Biography/</ref>

Bachmann is [[pro-life]], [[pro-gun]],<REF>[http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2008/10/bachmann_gets_n.shtml Bachmann gets new campaign manager, NRA endorsement] MN. Public Radio, OCTOBER 3, 2008</REF> pro-religion and holds many other core conservative values. She is widely considered one of the most important politicians in the fight against [[evolution]]. A search for her on [[Google]] turns up five positive sites for every 100 nasty liberal smear sites, like the [[Huffington Post]]. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has now officially put the outspoken Minnesota Republican in their sights with the bachmannwatch website. She has been heavily influenced by Francis Shaeffer, and is not afraid to defend her conservative Christian moral convictions against even the most desperate attacks by liberals.

== [[Liberal]] Hysteria about Bachmann ==

Liberals have been hysterical about some of the candid observations of Congresswoman Bachmann. She was targeted for comments made seeking an investigation into the [[Obama]]-[[William Ayers|Ayers]] connection, the "tolerant" liberal establishment even compared her to the Nazis.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/10/21/hardball-gone-mad-congresswoman-compared-nazi-insisting-media-cover-obam Hardball Gone Mad: Congresswoman Compared to Nazi for Insisting Media Cover Obama-Ayers Connection], Tim Graham, ''Newsbusters'', October 21, 2008</ref> She deserves many compliments for her insight and courage. Congresswoman Rep. Bachmann "has shown an uncanny knack for infuriating critics with sometimes off-the-wall behavior and comments, all the while advancing her own political career." <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/19/pub-michele-bachmann/ Outspoken But Not Outmaneuvered, Rep. Bachmann Manages Her Candor], Judson Berger, ''Fox News.com'', March 27, 2009</ref>

The liberal smears are part of a familiar pattern whereby they work overtime to try to discredit conservative women or minorities. The reason is obvious: conservative women and minorities disprove the falsehood that liberals are better for them.

Liberals have also tried to smear Michele Bachmann for her work as a tax attorney for the IRS. As usual, Congresswoman Bachmann rose above the liberal smears when she told a crowd "I went to work into that system because the first rule of war is 'know your enemy.'"<ref>http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/michele-bachmann-i-worked-for-the-irs-so-i-could-take-down-the-irs/</ref> Their newest line of attack is trying to demonize her opposition to government mandated vaccinations when abstinence is the truest prevention of HPV infection>.

Bachmann's husband has also been the target of smears by liberals, many of whom disapprove of his work to help misguided gay teens.

== See also ==
[[United States Presidential Election, 2012]]
[[File:Bachmann3.jpg|left|150px]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bachmann, Michele}}
[[Category: 110th United States Congress]]
[[Category: 111th United States Congress]]
[[Category:United States Representatives]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]
[[Category:2010 Midterm Elections]]
{{Conservatism}}
==External links==
*[http://www.michelebachmann.com/ Official Michele Bachmann For President website]
*[http://bachmann.house.gov/ Official Website]
*[http://www.opencongress.org/people/show/412216_michele_bachmann Open Congress]
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thR-lVuztIY Video of Bachmann talking about the gangster government on the House floor]

Job (economics)

2011-08-22T17:34:33Z

EdgarP: updated the addition that I added

*"... a job is not merely exertion in return for a [[pay check]]. It’s much more: activity that transforms [[resources]] from a less-valued form to a more-valued form in the eyes of [[consumer]]s." [http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/progressive-intolerance/]
*"it is not the aim of an [[economy]] to simply provide jobs, but to create jobs that maximize [[labor productivity]]. [http://www.thefreemanonline.org/book-reviews/how-an-economy-grows-and-why-it-crashes/]
*Barack Hussein Obama and the liberal elite have [http://www.gop.gov/blog/11/02/10/confirmed-again-obamacare destroyed jobs in America through Obamacare, trying to raise taxes on job creators, and regulating everything].

Christine O'Donnell

2011-08-22T01:26:37Z

EdgarP: Undo revision 904150 by JamesWilson (talk)

[[File:Christine.jpg|right]]
'''Christine O'Donnell''' (born August 27, 1969) is a [[pro-life]] political commentator for the [[Fox News]] channel, having appeared on [[The O'Reilly Factor]], [[Fox & Friends]], and [[Glenn Beck]]. She was the [[Tea Party Express]] and Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in [[Delaware]] in 2010, defeating [[pro-abortion]] RINO Congressman [[Mike Castle]]. She was defeated in the [[2010 Midterm Elections]] by her opponent, marxist [[Chris Coons]].

She has a book coming out in August 2011 entitled ''Troublemaker: Let’s Do What It Takes to Make America Great Again''

==Liberal Attacks==
Predictably, the [[liberal]] establishment has wasted no time in viciously attacking a woman who dares to defend [[pro-life]] and [[Christian]] beliefs. While such slander from liberal media like MSNBC is unsurprising, even supposedly unbiased networks like ABC have claimed that O'Donnell is "either lying or mentally unhinged."<ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2010/09/15/george-stephanopoulos-touts-attacks-odonnells-opponents-shes-mentall</ref> Liberal commentators also unfairly jumped at a previous video of her saying she used to "dabble into witchcraft," constantly mocking her as a "witch" throughout her 2010 senate run.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/13/christine.odonnell.profile/index.html</ref>

Some conservative commentators have observed the irony of liberals simultaneously claiming that the pro-life movement is anti-feminist while heaping contempt on any woman who dares to defy Democratic control and stand up for her own beliefs; in this way, the reaction to O'Donnell is remeniscint of the similar treatment of Sarah Palin in the 2008 Presidential Election.<ref>http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/vjackson/2010/09/15/the-perfect-feminist/</ref>

In 2011, liberal sexist Piers Morgan asked for Christine O'Donnell's views on gay marriage in a rude and unprofessional manner, causing Ms. O'Donnell to leave the set.

==Endorsements==
*[[Sarah Palin]] <ref>[http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=7197&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+RightPundits+(Right+Pundits) Sarah endorses Christine, Right Pundits, September 9, 2010]</ref>
*[[Mark Levin]]
*[[Michelle Malkin]]
*[[Rush Limbaugh]]
*[[Jim DeMint]]
*[[Sean Hannity]]
*[[Tea Party Express]]
*Independence Hall Tea Party PAC
*Diamond State Tea Party
*Our Country Deserves Better PAC
*[[Gun Owners of America]]
*[[NRA]]
*Citizens United PAC
*Delaware’s Common Sense Communities Society
*One Nation PAC
*Catholic Families of America
*Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund
*Tony Perkins and Family Research Council Action PAC
*Concerned Women PAC
*Pamela Geller
*Joanne Herring

==References==
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://www.christineodonnell.com/ Campaign Website]
*[http://teamchristine2010.com/ Team Christine 2010]
*[http://www.facebook.com/supportchristine Facebook page]
*[http://twitter.com/christineod Twitter page]

{{DEFAULTSORT:O'Donnell, Christine}}
[[Category:Republican Party]]
[[Category:2010 Midterm Elections]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Tea Party Movement]]
[[Category:Women]]
{{conservatism}}

Christine O'Donnell

2011-08-21T18:56:10Z

EdgarP:

Social media

2011-08-20T18:50:05Z

EdgarP: /* Criticism of Social Media */

[[File:Godsbook.jpg|right|200px]]

'''Social media''' is a term for websites and/or applications that allow users to share information and communicate with other users in a "social" setting.

==Characteristics of Users==
Unfortunately, many users become addicted to such sites. In fact, 2010 statistics for Facebook show users spend more than 928 million hours per month playing online games <ref>[http://socialtimes.com/facebook-gamers-hours-per-month_b24156 Facebook Gamers Play 927 Million Hours of Games Per Month [Infographic], Social Times, October 18, 2010]</ref>. This addictive behavior results in:

*depression [http://www.mobiledia.com/news/85472.html]
*lower academic and job-related achievement by those who spend time there{{fact}}
*interference with the development of good, lasting relationships
*displacement of healthy social gatherings{{fact}}
*increased likelihood of divorce<ref>[http://www.aaml.org/about-the-academy/press/press-releases/e-discovery/big-surge-social-networking-evidence-says-survey- AAML press release] </ref>
*higher exposure to [[cyberbullying]] and other online threats. <ref>[http://mg.co.za/article/2011-05-10-a-million-children-being-bullied-on-facebook 'A million children being bullied on Facebook', Mail&Guardian Online, May 10, 2011]</ref>

Social media experts and psychologists have noted that many users find the need to constantly update their status, check on other's statuses or play games suffer from what is known as "Facebook Addiction Disorder." The "disorder" was shown to be prevalent in young people, as a study showed that college students who were asked to abstain from facebook for 24 hours experienced helplessness, loneliness, and anxiety<ref>[http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Culture/Lifestyle/2011/Jul-09/Spending-hours-updating-your-status-You-may-be-a-Facebook-addict.ashx#axzz1RvVMJJOr Spending hours updating your status? You may be a Facebook addict] The Daily Star, July 9, 2011 </ref>

==Criticism of Social Media==

Despite several social media websites boasting large numbers of users, active user percentages have slowed or declined in recent times. For example, facebook reported only a 1.7% month to month increase in active users<ref>[http://www.buzzom.com/2011/06/facebooks-growth-rate-is-dropping-says-report/ Facebook’s Growth Rate is Dropping, says Report] Buzzom.com, June 13, 2011</ref>. Social media critics have noted that these sites often promote "hive-mind" behavior, where many users band together behind one ideology, usually liberalism. In June 2011, users of the website [[Reddit]] crashed White House phone lines<ref>[http://caivn.org/article/2011/06/18/internet-activists-crash-white-house-phone-lines-calling-end-war-drugs INTERNET ACTIVISTS CRASH WHITE HOUSE PHONE LINES CALLING FOR AN END TO THE WAR ON DRUGS] CA Independent Voter Network, June 18, 2011</ref>.

==Benefits of Social Media==

Republicans and conservatives, however, [[Twitter#Prominence|have been able to utilize the social media site Twitter more than their Democratic counterparts]]. Success of [[Tea Party]] rallies are a result of organizers utilizing social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, to engage volunteers and spread the word<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/11/organizers-recipes-effective-tea-parties/ Organizers Give Recipes for Effective Tea Parties] Fox News, April 11, 2009</ref>.

Employers have also used social media sites to vet potential employees, particularly to see if potential hires have engaged in sexist or racist commentary or displayed photos of illegal activities<ref>[http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/176227/have-you-cleaned-your-facebook-profile-your-next-job-may-depend-it Cleaned up your Facebook profile yet? Your next job may depend on it.] IT World, June 21, 2011</ref>.

Politicians who embrace [[Facebook]] seem to enjoy a short-term boost in popularity followed by a long-term decline in credibility.<ref>[[Barack Obama]] and [[Sarah Palin]] are two examples of this.</ref>

==Popular Social Media Sites==
*[[Facebook]]
*[[Twitter]]
*[[LinkedIn]]
*[[Google+]]
*[[MySpace]]

==References==

<references />

==External Links==
* [http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700139450/Priest-cautions-flock-against-allowing-children-on-Facebook.html Priest cautions flock against allowing children on Facebook]
* [http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/13/ask-matt-labash-the-social-media-scourge-embracing-the-new-dumbness-and-keeping-america-mediocre/ Ask Matt Labash: The social media scourge, embracing the new dumbness, and keeping America mediocre]

[[Category:Online social networking]]
[[Category:Websites]]

Pontiac

2011-08-20T18:37:54Z

EdgarP:

'''Pontiac''' was a division of [[General Motors|GM]]. It had a long and sometimes illustrious history including the [[Pontiac GTO]] which may have started the [[Muscle car]] craze. When the government took over GM, they shut down Pontiac, ostensibly to promote [[hybrid]] cars taht the American people don't want.
[[Category:cars]]

Job (economics)

2011-08-20T18:22:30Z

EdgarP:

*"... a job is not merely exertion in return for a [[pay check]]. It’s much more: activity that transforms [[resources]] from a less-valued form to a more-valued form in the eyes of [[consumer]]s." [http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/progressive-intolerance/]
*"it is not the aim of an [[economy]] to simply provide jobs, but to create jobs that maximize [[labor productivity]]. [http://www.thefreemanonline.org/book-reviews/how-an-economy-grows-and-why-it-crashes/]
*Barack Hussein Obama and the liberal elite have destroyed jobs in America through Obamacare, trying to raise taxes on job creators, and regulating everything.

It Gets Better

2011-08-20T18:14:14Z

EdgarP:

{{merge|Dan Savage}}'''It Gets Better project''' is the creation of [[Dan Savage]] and attempts to tackle the high levels of teen suicide, especially among [[homosexual]] teens. What Dan has done is to get national recognition, a campaign message of false hope that reached to the [[White House]], ''It Gets Better''.

It is noble to help troubled young people but it's wrong to deceive them. Dan Savage's video message is wrong. These teens need help, they need more, they need the truth. Mentally and physically, it gets better by leaving homosexuality. At the least, [[abstinence]] will prolong your life, not shorten it, unlike what Savage and the gay agenda advocates.

==Partners==
Various benefactors are lined up including: [[GLSEN]], [[George Soros]], [[ACLU]], and [[The Trevor Project]]. [[Barack Hussein Obama]] became involved and like Savage, recorded a video in support of It Gets Better. To Obama, its a civil rights issue. Inspired by Obama, the White House Staff created a video in support of ''It Gets Better'' project. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL2Ed_iKiG4 White House Staff, YouTube]

==External Links==
*[http://www.itgetsbetter.org/pages/about-it-gets-better-project/ official website:about it gets better project]
*[http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/civil-rights/it-gets-better White House website, Obama "It Gets Better"]

[[Category:Activists]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Charity]]

Michele Bachmann

2011-08-20T07:10:38Z

EdgarP: /* Liberal Criticisms */

{{Officeholder
|name=Michele Bachmann
|image=Michele Bachmann.jpg
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=Marcus Bachmann
|religion= Non-Denominational Christian
(Was formerly a member of the [[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]])<REF>[http://www.christianpost.com/news/michele-bachmann-leaves-church-gets-catholic-support-52384/ Bachmann leaves church] Anugrah Kumar, The Christian Post, 27 July 2011</REF>
|offices=
{{Officeholder/representative
|state=Minnesota
|district=6th
|terms=January 4, 2007 – Present
|preceded=Mark Kennedy
|former=
|succeeded=
}}
}}

'''Michele M. Bachmann''', born April 6, 1956 (age {{age|1956|04|06}}), is a [[conservative]] and the first [[Republican Party|Republican]] woman to be elected to the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] from [[Minnesota]]. She represents the 6th District of Minnesota.

A [[movement conservative]], Michele Bachmann defeated a massive attempt by [[liberals]] to unseat her in 2008 and 2010. Prior to her election to [[Congress]], she served in the Minnesota state [[legislature]] since first being elected there in 2000 as a check against the leftists then encroaching on Minnesota's freedoms.

Michele Bachmann, an [[attorney]], is a former tax litigator. She has five [[children]] and has also opened her home to 23 foster children.<ref>http://bachmann.house.gov/Biography/</ref>

Bachmann is [[pro-life]], [[pro-gun]],<REF>[http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2008/10/bachmann_gets_n.shtml Bachmann gets new campaign manager, NRA endorsement] MN. Public Radio, OCTOBER 3, 2008</REF> pro-religion and holds many other core conservative values. She is widely considered one of the most important politicians in the fight against [[evolution]]. A search for her on [[Google]] turns up five positive sites for every 100 nasty liberal smear sites, like the [[Huffington Post]]. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has now officially put the outspoken Minnesota Republican in their sights with the bachmannwatch website. She has been heavily influenced by Francis Shaeffer, and is not afraid to defend her conservative Christian moral convictions against even the most desperate attacks by liberals.

== Early Life ==

== [[Liberal]] Criticisms ==

Liberals have been hysterical about some of the candid observations of Congresswoman Bachmann. She was targeted for comments made seeking an investigation into the [[Obama]]-[[William Ayers|Ayers]] connection, the "tolerant" liberal establishment even compared her to the Nazis.<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/10/21/hardball-gone-mad-congresswoman-compared-nazi-insisting-media-cover-obam Hardball Gone Mad: Congresswoman Compared to Nazi for Insisting Media Cover Obama-Ayers Connection], Tim Graham, ''Newsbusters'', October 21, 2008</ref> She deserves many compliments for her insight and courage. Congresswoman Rep. Bachmann "has shown an uncanny knack for infuriating critics with sometimes off-the-wall behavior and comments, all the while advancing her own political career." <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/19/pub-michele-bachmann/ Outspoken But Not Outmaneuvered, Rep. Bachmann Manages Her Candor], Judson Berger, ''Fox News.com'', March 27, 2009</ref>

Liberals have also tried to smear Michele Bachmann for her work as a tax attorney for the IRS. As usual, Congresswoman Bachmann rose above the liberal smears when she told a crowd "I went to work into that system because the first rule of war is 'know your enemy.'"<ref>http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/michele-bachmann-i-worked-for-the-irs-so-i-could-take-down-the-irs/</ref>

Bachmann's husband has also been the target of smears by liberals, many of whom disapprove of his work to help misguided gay teens. Some liberal celebrities such as Dan Savage and Jon Stewart have even gone so far as to insist that Marcus is himself a homosexual <ref>http://www.mrc.org/cmi/articles/2011/Lefty_Hypocrites_Level_Gay_Slurs_.html</ref>

== See also ==
[[United States Presidential Election, 2012]]
[[File:Bachmann3.jpg|left|150px]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bachmann, Michele}}
[[Category: 110th United States Congress]]
[[Category: 111th United States Congress]]
[[Category:United States Representatives]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]
[[Category:2010 Midterm Elections]]
{{Conservatism}}
==External links==
*[http://www.michelebachmann.com/ Official Michele Bachmann For President website]
*[http://bachmann.house.gov/ Official Website]
*[http://www.opencongress.org/people/show/412216_michele_bachmann Open Congress]
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thR-lVuztIY Video of Bachmann talking about the gangster government on the House floor]