Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Civil Rights Movement

2007-08-16T13:59:18Z

Panini: New page: This article on the civil rights movement is appallingly short.~~~~

This article on the civil rights movement is appallingly short.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 09:59, 16 August 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-08-05T02:51:36Z

Panini:

"Although, further reading of Luke suggests that Jesus believed that those without great means, are as righteous (or more) in his eyes as those to whom wealth is abundant.

And [Jesus] looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury. And He saw a certain poor widow putting in two small copper coins. And He said, "Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all of them; for they all out of their surplus put into the offering; but she out of her poverty put in all that she had to live on." (NAS, Luke 21:1-4)"

The author of this line, and his attempted inclusion of it within this article, failed to take note of the fact that such contribution is voluntary in nature, and from the heart. Proponents of universal health care are the opposite; that is, they seek to take such funding from people by force, and such individuals use Bible passages out of context to support their views. That is called ''theft'', and it is just plain wrong. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:43, 6 July 2007 (EDT)

:If the people, poor and rich alike, choose to vote to provide a service out of their portion of taxes, so be it: It is not theft. America is based on the principles of democracy, wherein members of a society have a right to exercise their beliefs, and in whereas a plurality of members agree to adopt new policies, those policies become the law governing all. To suggest that the rules of democracy are equivalent to forced acceptance is ridiculous. To purport that the voting process is involuntary, and against God, is to say that God himself is against democracy. I sincerely doubt that God is against democracy (It is "one nation under God", is it not?).

:Per your statement that I am using Bible passages out of context to support "their" views... I think you have misjudged my intentions. I am not seeking to support the views of the liberal left, nor do I particularly seek to support the views of the conservative right. I am but a humble man, who is meerly pointing out the gaps in your logic. The seething toxicity of your words and reactions (removing honest attempts at debate) donotes a deeply held hatred of your fellow man, and I fear that it has blinded you from the true wisdom of Jesus. Lest you forget, that Jesus himself preached to poor and dejected souls, we should not cast disparaging remarks against those not fortunate to have the benefits of wealth.

:Unfortunately, I suspect that my words shall go unheeded, and that you will revert my contributions yet again. Sadly, I will only have the legacy of the wiki history feature to mark my attempts at tempering your misgivings. I can only hope that God has a T1.
:[[User:LambOfMichael|LambOfMichael]]

::I agree with you, LambOfMichael, and disagree with Karajou, on the point that taxation is not "theft", and the words "by force" are inappropriate (by ''compulsion'' would have been better).
::However, this debate is not really over the whether taxation is theft or not, but over whether or not the government should be providing universal health care from taxpayer's compulsorily-acquired money. On that point, I agree with Karajou that the Bible is not talking about government support for the poor, but ''individual'' support for the poor. So his reversions were justified on those grounds.
::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:39, 6 July 2007 (EDT)

== Canada ==

I don't like controversy or controversial articles, but I saw this in RC and I just couldn't let [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Universal_health_care&diff=226677&oldid=226670 this] go. Canada's health care system isn't quite that simplistic. The situation is that Canadian citizens cannot jump the queue on health care. For-pay services exist (and are regularly used by non-citizens, such as myself), and are available to citizens (who regularly purcase supplementary insurance), but service providers must charge a fixed rate and handle patients in a specifically regulated order.

That said, I probably won't write a section on universal health care in Canada for this article, as it's going to be a magnet for controversy. Besides the American controversy, it was a major issue in the last Canadian national election, and when the Conservative coalition inevitably falls apart, it's going to be an issue in the next one. I just wanted to fix that glib inaccuracy. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 12:23, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

:Don't worry about it, the guy who wrote it was a vandal. I've reverted every contribution he's made to CP so far... [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 12:38, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
::Heh, okay. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 12:44, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

==Points of view==

As to whether UHC is biblical, or whether it works out as well in totalitarian countries as in the free West, we need to present a balanced view.

It would help if we got some practice expressing both sides. Try contributing to [[Debate:Is universal health care better than market-based medicine?]] first. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:02, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

==Substandard==

The article was almost pure opinion and POV. Better to have nothing than something this poorly written.

Someone, please start over with a good definition of what UHC is - or is supposed to be.

For example, how is it different from [[socialized medicine]] or [[free health insurance]]?

Is it an ideal, or a government mandate?

Who wants it, and why?

Does it describe a ''law'' or a ''situation''? Does it entail a ''system'', or does it refer to a hoped-for ''reality''?

Perhaps it would be easier to describe [[health care]] in various countries we are all familiar with, first. Start with the family doctor, or the local hospital. Talk about [[health insurance]] and [[HMO]]s provided by local employers. Add to that [[Medicaid]] and [[Medicare]], or their counterparts overseas.

Then write some articles about places where people are too poor to get decent medical care.

Only then can we really write adequately about the partisan politics of "health". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:14, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
:I can start working on it. I haven't had a good research project since summer started. And I won't be taking any poli sci courses next semester so it might be my last for a while :(
:It would have been nice if you had done the normal procedure, though, and protected it instead of completely removing it. At least we can see what used to be there; I certainly didn't think it was opinionated before, and now I can't re-read it to make sure! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:20, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

:After you start the new version, I will un-delete the old version and put it somewhere where you can see it. Please leave me a note on my talk page when your first draft is ready for me to look at. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:50, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

::So... is that old version coming any time soon? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 21:18, 12 July 2007 (EDT)
:::By the magic of Google...[http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:XT0oRyWnhPoJ:www.conservapedia.com/Universal_health_care]
::::Thanks Jalepeno! I completely forgot about cache searching. Hrm and now that I see the article I see that I was right; it was bad, but in no way delete-worthy. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 00:33, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

"Single-payer health care is a system in which one entity pays for the health care of the entire population. This entity is traditionally the federal government, and the system is paid for through taxes. Canada, Cuba and North Korea are the only 3 countries using this system."
The above is a quote from the article. What about the countries of Europe, Latin America, Africa and Asia that have single-payer health care systems?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 23:02, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
::which one?[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 14:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

France, Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, et al. in Europe. China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Australia in Asia. Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay in Latin America. [User:Panini|Panini]] 10:57, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

::all of those countries have multi-payer health-care system, except China, which has abolished universal health care since the death Mao (China is right now communism in name only). [[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 16:10, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Explain to me the difference between single-payer health care and health care supplied by the federal government for free and is supported by taxation of the people, such as the system in the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Argentina and many other countries.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 11:23, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

:I sould assume that all of those countries allow you to buy private insurance to supliment or replace their government insurance, which is the definition of multi-payer insurance. (I learned a lot about insurance when researching this article :) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 21:58, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

Then Canada does not belong in that category as you can buy health insurance to supplement government insurance.. [[User:Carpet88|Carpet88]] 11:27, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

There seems to be some kind of taboo about universal healthcare as if it were against the will of God. It's hard for me to understand what is so terrifying about it.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 17:41, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

:Hopefully this isn't in the article? I tried to make it as factual as possible, leaving debate for another page. I don't think you have to go very far, however, if you want to see why people dislike universal health care, especially on this site :) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 18:28, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

How far would that be?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:51, 4 August 2007 (EDT)

Mycenaean language

2007-08-03T14:41:27Z

Panini:

The Mycenaean language existed in the eastern [[Mediterranean]] region among the Bronze Age [[Mycenaeans]], (who called themselves Achaeans) an Indo-European people who arrived in Greece and the Aegean about 2000BC. They formed a culture - the first civilization on mainland Europe - starting about 1650BC. The civilization, and with it literacy, disappeared between 1100BC and 1000BC in the great disruptions caused by the movement of what are called the "Sea Peoples" throughout the area The language has been lost and is no longer spoken, however its writing, known as Linear B, was deciphered in 1953, and shows the language to have been a form of Greek.

[[Category: Ancient Greece.]]

Domino theory

2007-08-01T23:06:19Z

Panini:

The '''Domino Theory''' proposed that if a country came under the influence of Communists there would follow a “domino effect” that would spread [[communism]] to other nearby countries. This theory drove [[foreign policy]] in the 20th Century. The theory was first advanced during Harry S. Truman’s presidency. The Domino Theory was a phrase that became popular during the administration of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower. According to this theory, once nations such as [[Vietnam]] fell to communism, other countries of Asia would fall like a row of standing dominos, one after the other, each knocking the next over.

==In the 1950s and the Vietnam War==

[[Secretary of State]] Dulles explained the phrase in a 1954 press conference, referring to his plans for the treaty negotiations that led to the creation of [[SEATO]]:
:"The situation in that area, as we found it, was that it was subject to the so-called 'domino theory.'" "You mean that if one went, another would go?" "We are trying to change it so that would not be the case.... You generally have a whole series of countries that can be picked up one by one. That is the whole theory of the North Atlantic Treaty. When the nations come together, then the so-called 'domino theory' ceases to apply."<ref>The Dulles' Statements on Indo-China, ''The New York Times,'' May 12, 1954, p. 6</ref>

During the [[Vietnam War]], the phrase was heard often. Supporters of the war gave the theory as a reason for staying in the war. The actual phrase "domino theory" though, was usually used dismissively by opponents of the war. They thought this theory was an exaggeration. A New York Times columnist [[mockery|mocked]] it in these words:
:...two of the favorite propositions of its supporters have been particularly hard for opponents to accept. One is the so-called "domino theory"—that if South Vietnam fell to the Communists, other nations in the area would topple like dominoes until the United States was thrown back to Pearl Harbor, or perhaps the West Coast.<ref>Wicker, Tom (1967), "Southeast Asia: Dominoes and Master Plan," ''The New York Times,'' February 12, 1967, p. 180</ref>

In the end, Vietnam did fall to the Communists, but the spread of Communism was largely contained. In fact, the Vietnamese Army put an end to the Maoist regie of Pol Pot, andd the genocidal campaign it conducted in Cambodia.

==In recent years==

Before the 2003 [[Iraq war]], [[neoconservative]] theorists suggested that a liberated [[Iraq]] could be a vanguard of [[democracy]]. A democratic Iraq would lead to the fall of authoritarian rulers in neighboring states, and the spread of democracy throughout the Middle East. This has sometimes been called the "democratic domino theory" or the "reverse domino theory."

==Real falling dominoes==
Since 2001, a commercial organization in the Netherlands has organized an event called Domino Day. Teams of volunteers build enormous displays consisting literally of millions of dominos, then topple them all. The displays consist of huge three-dimensional sculptures that often appear to move or change as the dominoes fall. In 2006, the organization toppled 4,079,381 to set a new record.

==References==
<references/>

==External links==
*[http://www.dominodomain.com/biggest-domino-project Domino Day] Commercial website

[[category:politics]]

Talk:Domino theory

2007-08-01T22:53:14Z

Panini:

==How I got the New York Times references==

Where I live, my local public library provides access to a number of electronic databases, including a searchable, complete database that includes every issue of ''The New York Times'' back to 1851. And I can even access it from home, by typing in my library card.

It is a very valuable resource for writing encyclopedia articles, and it is fascinating to comb through these old newspapers.

I think many libraries provide similar services. For example,

[http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itweb/njslnews_lmac the New Jersey State Library] system offers database access to anyone typing in a library card number. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 10:31, 20 January 2007 (EST)

What does Domino Day have to do with the Domino Theory?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 18:53, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Domino theory

2007-08-01T22:36:09Z

Panini:

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-08-01T21:41:35Z

Panini:

Talk:Diadochi

2007-07-23T23:27:00Z

Panini: New page: This Ptolemy is improperly linked to the astonomer Ptolemy, who is a different person.~~~~

This Ptolemy is improperly linked to the astonomer Ptolemy, who is a different person.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 19:27, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Minimum wage

2007-07-23T22:36:10Z

Panini: New page: If there were no mimimum wage law or unions in the United States, employers would be paying laborers what they are paid in Indonesia.~~~~

If there were no mimimum wage law or unions in the United States, employers would be paying laborers what they are paid in Indonesia.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 18:36, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Protests against American involvement in the Vietnam War

2007-07-21T17:55:55Z

Panini:

Fascinating that this article's main part describes one of the more bizarre demonstrations against the Vietnam War. One almost has the feeling that the writer considers the protests trivial. Perhaps he wasn't born until after the war or was too young to remember it.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 23:26, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

I see the author of the article is very carefully cherry-picking news stories that discredit the protests against the Vietnam War, as if only terrorists and crazy people opposed the war. Perhaps the author might try reading a little history.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 11:28, 20 July 2007 (EDT)
:Stop complaining and try making factual edits. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 11:51, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

Perhaps you would like me to put in the reasons there were protests against the war.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 11:58, 20 July 2007 (EDT)
::Assuming you add factual content and you don't disseminate liberal propaganda, go ahead. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 14:26, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

Perhaps you could explain to me what "liberal propaganda" is and then I'll be able to to make a contribution. Otherwise I'm wasting my time on Conservapedia.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 13:55, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Illegal immigration

2007-07-21T17:46:30Z

Panini:

Some pretty sweeping statements there. Not all illegals are Mexicans, and many of them do speak some English. Also, many American citizens do not speak English. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 16:06, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

==Misc ideas I just had==
Seems to me the reason for so much illegal immigration is that it takes upwards of a decade to get citizenship. Maybe we should do something to streamline the process and make it easier to get citizenship? That gets rid of tax-dodging, insuranceless illegals working for less than minimum wage.

Also, I think that forcing schools to teach in two languages is crap, and what we need to do is to build special schools where immigrant children are given one year of intensified English language training, which will prepare them for learning in an English school curriculum. Just put them right where they left off in a normal school once they're done learning English.

Of course, we absolutely wouldn't have any of these problems if Mexico wasn't such a cesspool of subhuman living conditions around the border. Believe me, I've been there, and it's awful. People living in unfinished houses and whatnot.

I used to live in Mexico. They view their north the way we view our south...[[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 11:44, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

== WHAT IS GOING ON HERE? ==

Why does the entry for "Guatemalan" redirect to "Illegal Immigration?" I call RACISM! [[User:Jacobin|Jacobin]] 21:21, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:It's been deleted, and the user has been warned. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 21:22, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

== Illegal Immigration in Mexico ==

I used to live in Mexico. They were not kind to the illegals who came there from Central America. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 18:53, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

It seems to me that some of the illegal immigration hysteria is based on prejudice. In New York City I hear the same things about Asians as about Hispanics. In northern New England I bet they're hysterical about French Canadians coming into the U.S. I have the impression that many people don't make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. As long as the immigrants don't come from Europe, they're all considered illegal.[[User:Oldoligarch|Oldoligarch]] 17:46, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

== Liberty ==

Like the Lady says:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I will build a fence to keep them out! [[User:PerpetualAngst|PerpetualAngst]] 20:53, 19 June 2007 (PDT)

Fences at the Mexican border, fences in Palestine...fences everywhere...this is progress? [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:56, 20 June 2007 (EDT)
:No different than the fences in one's own yard. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:03, 20 June 2007 (EDT)
:Just a little higher than the average Joe can jump.--[[User:Will N.|Will N.]] 15:15, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

The debate over illegal immigration is thinly disguised racism. It used to be Irish, Swedes, Poles, Jews, Italians, Blacks, et al. that were ruining the country. Now it's Mexicans. Who's next?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 13:46, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Protests against American involvement in the Vietnam War

2007-07-20T15:58:32Z

Panini:

Talk:Protests against American involvement in the Vietnam War

2007-07-20T15:28:26Z

Panini:

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-07-20T15:23:49Z

Panini:

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-07-18T16:14:54Z

Panini:

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-07-18T14:57:26Z

Panini:

"Although, further reading of Luke suggests that Jesus believed that those without great means, are as righteous (or more) in his eyes as those to whom wealth is abundant.

And [Jesus] looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury. And He saw a certain poor widow putting in two small copper coins. And He said, "Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all of them; for they all out of their surplus put into the offering; but she out of her poverty put in all that she had to live on." (NAS, Luke 21:1-4)"

The author of this line, and his attempted inclusion of it within this article, failed to take note of the fact that such contribution is voluntary in nature, and from the heart. Proponents of universal health care are the opposite; that is, they seek to take such funding from people by force, and such individuals use Bible passages out of context to support their views. That is called ''theft'', and it is just plain wrong. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:43, 6 July 2007 (EDT)

:If the people, poor and rich alike, choose to vote to provide a service out of their portion of taxes, so be it: It is not theft. America is based on the principles of democracy, wherein members of a society have a right to exercise their beliefs, and in whereas a plurality of members agree to adopt new policies, those policies become the law governing all. To suggest that the rules of democracy are equivalent to forced acceptance is ridiculous. To purport that the voting process is involuntary, and against God, is to say that God himself is against democracy. I sincerely doubt that God is against democracy (It is "one nation under God", is it not?).

:Per your statement that I am using Bible passages out of context to support "their" views... I think you have misjudged my intentions. I am not seeking to support the views of the liberal left, nor do I particularly seek to support the views of the conservative right. I am but a humble man, who is meerly pointing out the gaps in your logic. The seething toxicity of your words and reactions (removing honest attempts at debate) donotes a deeply held hatred of your fellow man, and I fear that it has blinded you from the true wisdom of Jesus. Lest you forget, that Jesus himself preached to poor and dejected souls, we should not cast disparaging remarks against those not fortunate to have the benefits of wealth.

:Unfortunately, I suspect that my words shall go unheeded, and that you will revert my contributions yet again. Sadly, I will only have the legacy of the wiki history feature to mark my attempts at tempering your misgivings. I can only hope that God has a T1.
:[[User:LambOfMichael|LambOfMichael]]

::I agree with you, LambOfMichael, and disagree with Karajou, on the point that taxation is not "theft", and the words "by force" are inappropriate (by ''compulsion'' would have been better).
::However, this debate is not really over the whether taxation is theft or not, but over whether or not the government should be providing universal health care from taxpayer's compulsorily-acquired money. On that point, I agree with Karajou that the Bible is not talking about government support for the poor, but ''individual'' support for the poor. So his reversions were justified on those grounds.
::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:39, 6 July 2007 (EDT)

== Canada ==

I don't like controversy or controversial articles, but I saw this in RC and I just couldn't let [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Universal_health_care&diff=226677&oldid=226670 this] go. Canada's health care system isn't quite that simplistic. The situation is that Canadian citizens cannot jump the queue on health care. For-pay services exist (and are regularly used by non-citizens, such as myself), and are available to citizens (who regularly purcase supplementary insurance), but service providers must charge a fixed rate and handle patients in a specifically regulated order.

That said, I probably won't write a section on universal health care in Canada for this article, as it's going to be a magnet for controversy. Besides the American controversy, it was a major issue in the last Canadian national election, and when the Conservative coalition inevitably falls apart, it's going to be an issue in the next one. I just wanted to fix that glib inaccuracy. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 12:23, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

:Don't worry about it, the guy who wrote it was a vandal. I've reverted every contribution he's made to CP so far... [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 12:38, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
::Heh, okay. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 12:44, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

==Points of view==

As to whether UHC is biblical, or whether it works out as well in totalitarian countries as in the free West, we need to present a balanced view.

It would help if we got some practice expressing both sides. Try contributing to [[Debate:Is universal health care better than market-based medicine?]] first. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:02, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

==Substandard==

The article was almost pure opinion and POV. Better to have nothing than something this poorly written.

Someone, please start over with a good definition of what UHC is - or is supposed to be.

For example, how is it different from [[socialized medicine]] or [[free health insurance]]?

Is it an ideal, or a government mandate?

Who wants it, and why?

Does it describe a ''law'' or a ''situation''? Does it entail a ''system'', or does it refer to a hoped-for ''reality''?

Perhaps it would be easier to describe [[health care]] in various countries we are all familiar with, first. Start with the family doctor, or the local hospital. Talk about [[health insurance]] and [[HMO]]s provided by local employers. Add to that [[Medicaid]] and [[Medicare]], or their counterparts overseas.

Then write some articles about places where people are too poor to get decent medical care.

Only then can we really write adequately about the partisan politics of "health". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:14, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
:I can start working on it. I haven't had a good research project since summer started. And I won't be taking any poli sci courses next semester so it might be my last for a while :(
:It would have been nice if you had done the normal procedure, though, and protected it instead of completely removing it. At least we can see what used to be there; I certainly didn't think it was opinionated before, and now I can't re-read it to make sure! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:20, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

:After you start the new version, I will un-delete the old version and put it somewhere where you can see it. Please leave me a note on my talk page when your first draft is ready for me to look at. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:50, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

::So... is that old version coming any time soon? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 21:18, 12 July 2007 (EDT)
:::By the magic of Google...[http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:XT0oRyWnhPoJ:www.conservapedia.com/Universal_health_care]
::::Thanks Jalepeno! I completely forgot about cache searching. Hrm and now that I see the article I see that I was right; it was bad, but in no way delete-worthy. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 00:33, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

"Single-payer health care is a system in which one entity pays for the health care of the entire population. This entity is traditionally the federal government, and the system is paid for through taxes. Canada, Cuba and North Korea are the only 3 countries using this system."
The above is a quote from the article. What about the countries of Europe, Latin America, Africa and Asia that have single-payer health care systems?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 23:02, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
::which one?[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 14:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

France, Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, et al. in Europe. Turkey, Japan, India, Sri Lanka, et al. in Asia. Argentina, Venezuela, et al. in Latin America. Egypt et al. in Africa.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 10:57, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Senators

2007-07-17T20:33:39Z

Panini: New page: "Richard Nixon played second base for the Senators before going into politics." This is a quote from the article. I had no idea Nixon was so talented. Did Reagan play shortstop?~~~~

"Richard Nixon played second base for the Senators before going into politics." This is a quote from the article. I had no idea Nixon was so talented. Did Reagan play shortstop?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 16:33, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Vladimir Pozner

2007-07-17T18:26:43Z

Panini:

How about an article on Phil Donahue?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 23:19, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
:This Vladimir Pozner is actually Vladimir Pozner of [[Radio Moscow]] and the Donahue Show's father. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:23, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
Conservapedia might consider an article on Phil Donahue, since it has one on Vladimir Pozner.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 13:22, 16 July 2007 (EDT)
:CP doesn't have an article on the Vladimir Pozner who used to be on the Pozner/Donahue Show. This article here is that Vladimir Pozner's father. The Vladimir Pozner who used to appear with Donahue was about 10 years old during WWII. According to WP, this is Vladimir Aleksandrovich Pozner, the son is Vladimir Vladimirovich Pozner. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:30, 16 July 2007 (EDT)

Conservapedia might consider an article on Phil Donahue.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 14:26, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Vladimir Pozner

2007-07-16T17:22:09Z

Panini:

Talk:Protests against American involvement in the Vietnam War

2007-07-16T03:26:59Z

Panini: New page: Fascinating that this article's main part describes one of the more bizarre demonstrations against the Vietnam War. One almost has the feeling that the writer considers the protests trivia...

Talk:Vladimir Pozner

2007-07-16T03:19:35Z

Panini: New page: How about an article on Phil Donahue?~~~~

How about an article on Phil Donahue?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 23:19, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

Vladimir Putin

2007-07-16T03:08:19Z

Panini:

[[Image:Vladtheimpaler.jpg|right|thumb|Vladimir Putin]]
'''Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin''' (''Russian'': Владимир Владимирович Путин) (born October 7, 1952) is the [[president]] of the [[Russian Federation]] since New Year's Eve of 1999, the day [[Boris Yeltsin]] resigned from the presidency. Putin was later elected as president by approximately 52.94% of the Russian electorate on March 26, 2000. He is mainly backed by the '[[United Russia]]' (''Единая Россия'') party, which currently holds a majority in the lower chamber of the Russian parliament, known as the ''Duma''. The Party usually reflects the political views of Putin, which are that of moderate conservatism and nationalism. The next major political party in Russia is the '[[Communist Party]]' (which Putin is antagonistic towards) which still holds influence but the '[[Bolshevik]]' Party (being the old Communist Party) is banned.

Putin was born in [[Leningrad]] on [[October]] 7, 1952. He was educated in law and economics at Leningrad State University before being assigned to work in the [[KGB]]. After five years in [[East Germany]], he took up various political positions before becoming [[prime minister]] in 1999. He has been elected [[president]] for two terms, 2000 and 2004.

Putin is seen generally as an antagonist in the West; his presidency has become increasingly authoritarian and it is uncertain whether he will stand down when his term runs out for the last time in 2008. Putin has been described as a [[dictator]] by many critics. For example, on April 14, 2007, Russian riot police beat a number of protesters and journalists at an anti-Putin rally at Pushkin Square in [[Moscow]]. <ref>''The Economist'', April 21, 2007</ref> Despite these political trends, Putin remains popular in Russia<ref>http://www.levada.ru/prezident.html Putin's Approval Ratings</ref>. Since coming to power, Putin has grown Russia's economy and brought inflation down there. <ref>''Time Magazine'', February 26, 2007</ref> The majority of Russians are relatively uninterested in politics outside of issues affecting their personal prosperity. <ref>''The Economist'', April 21, 2007</ref> and journalist [[Anna Politkovskaya]] argued that the Russian people, as a whole, have been willing to tolerate violence in the name of "comfort and peace and quiet". <ref>Politkovskaya, Anna. Putin's Russia. London: Harvill Press, 2004</ref> (Politkovskaya, an outspoken critic of Putin, was assassinated in 2006 <ref>http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1819666.ece</ref>, and it is widely believed that the Russian government had some involvement in this death.)

He is married to Lyudmila Putina since July 28, 1983 (former airline stewardess). They have two daughters.

Vladimir Putin will visit the United States on July 1-2.

== See also ==

*[[Communism]]
*[[New Economic Policy]]
*[[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics]]

==References==
<references/>

==Links==
[http://www.kremlin.ru/articles/V_Putin.shtml Official Putin Biography]
{{DEFAULTSORT: Putin, Vladimir}}
[[Category:Political people]]

Talk:Universal Health Care

2007-07-16T03:02:15Z

Panini:

Talk:North America

2007-07-16T02:54:17Z

Panini:

Re, Greenland. That's an interresting thought.

: ''but as Greenland is actually a territory of Denmark, it is technically part of Europe.'' But French Guyana is constitutionally a Departement of Metropolitan France. I don't think anyone would classify French Guyana as - geographically - part of Europe. [[User:Unthank|Unthank]] 07:01, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

The article says that North America is partly in the Northern Hemisphere - what part of it is not? [[User:Chrysogonus|Chrysogonus]] 07:10, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
:Is it Guam?[[User:Muschifresser|Muschifresser]] 07:16, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I had no idea Guam was part of North America. I thought it was in the Pacific Ocean, like Hawaii.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:51, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

I never heard of Amerigo Versacci. I have heard of Amerigo Vespucci. Perhaps Versace the clothes designer was meant. What about the Welshman? Did he make maps like Amerigo Vespucci?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:54, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:North America

2007-07-16T02:51:10Z

Panini:

Talk:Impeachment and removal

2007-07-16T02:45:41Z

Panini:

The section on Clinton has been rather obviously copied and pasted unthinkingly from somewhere else: 'Hillary Clinton, pollster's choice to run in 2004' - th=at statement must be at least four years old.

Since we're discussing the impeachment of President Clinton, when is the current president going to be impeached and removed from office, as some conservatives, such as Bruce Fein, have already called for?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:44, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

==Precise meaning of term==

Should we say that impeachment is removal? This seems confusing to me.

I'd rather say that impeachment is the ''first step'' in removing an official from office. Impeachment is the formal accusation by the House. ''Removal'' requires confirmation by the Senate. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:53, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Impeachment and removal

2007-07-16T02:44:51Z

Panini:

The section on Clinton has been rather obviously copied and pasted unthinkingly from somewhere else: 'Hillary Clinton, pollster's choice to run in 2004' - th=at statement must be at least four years old.

==Precise meaning of term==

Should we say that impeachment is removal? This seems confusing to me.

I'd rather say that impeachment is the ''first step'' in removing an official from office. Impeachment is the formal accusation by the House. ''Removal'' requires confirmation by the Senate. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:53, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Since we're discussing the impeachment of President Clinton, when is the current president going to be impeached and removed from office, as some conservatives, such as Bruce Fein, have already called for?[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:44, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Lebanon

2007-07-11T16:16:31Z

Panini:

Perhaps we could begin to give some of the modern info about the topic. The Levant is an incredibly important area in modern times.--[[User:PalMD|PalMD]][[User_talk:PalMD|talk]] 17:58, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

I second the above request.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 12:16, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Cyrus

2007-07-09T00:05:15Z

Panini:

[[image:Cyrus portrait.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Cyrus''' lived 576-529 BC. He was King of the [[Persian Empire]] and is also called '''Cyrus the Great'''. He established the Achaemenid dynasty. He is famous for conquering [[Babylon]] and sending the [[Jew]]s back to their homeland, [[Israel]].

[[Category:Political people]]
[[Category:Ancient History]]

{{stub}}

Talk:Woody Allen

2007-07-08T23:49:00Z

Panini: New page: Fabulous article.~~~~

Fabulous article.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 19:49, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Mexico

2007-07-08T23:40:46Z

Panini:

Thanks for doing the merge, Scott. It's not simply a matter of copy and paste, or I would have done it myself instead of tagging the articles. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 09:53, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:No worries - I hope the information is correct - I don't know enough about Mexico to tell, but I've fixed a few pretty dodgy country pages today. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 10:14, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Are American style tacos really the best representative picture for the Mexico article? [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 22:59, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:Probably not - especially since they're not mentioned in the text. Should they be removed, or have text or caption increased to create some connection? Please do whatever is best, and if you have a better picture, please add it. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 10:51, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

== Emigration ==

This new paragraph

''== Emigration ==''

''Many Americans (from US) have become angry at tendency for Mexicans to go to the United States, where there is a perception that they are welcome to go and use this healthy economy to make money. Because many aspects of such a culture (such as the common unwillingness to learn or speak English) which are incompatible with American (from US) values, these people are often unwelcome, especially those who immigrate illegally. Groups such as the Minutemen have been active in stopping this influx (sometimes killing them), but it is still a problem with which the US must contend.''

is not in the proper article. This matter concern basically to the United States and ''there'' it should be. Not in an article about Mexico.

--[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 18:53, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm prone to disagree. Remember that Conservapedia seeks to illuminate the American perspective, so it makes sense that such a huge issue should at least be mentioned. To suggest otherwise would imply a bias for those who choose to come to this country illegally.
[[User:ATB|ATB]] 18:51, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

A common unwillingness to learn to speak English? I guess the three years I spent teaching English in Mexico was a fluke. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 20:02, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

I must point out that those were the ones who weren't coming over here. [[User:ATB|ATB]] 10:49, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

== VERY LITTLE ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ==

WHY?

Because, frankly, this site is turning embarrassingly leftist. I'm not sure this is really what was originally intended at all, in fact. The idea that they are unwilling to confront such a huge issue (see my deleted portion of this article) which bluntly threatens the American way of life betrays a soft spot for bleeding heart, socialistic concepts of everybody being exactly the same. Am I the only one who feels this way? [[User:ATB|ATB]] 15:13, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

Are you sure that all illegal aliens are Mexican? Where I live, everyone complains about Asians. I believe in northern New England they complain about French Canadians. I think in Florida they complain about the Cubans and Haitians. My impression is that you would like everyone to be exactly the same, i.e. speaking English, same political ideas, same religion, same clothing, same customs, etc.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 19:39, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Mexico

2007-07-08T23:39:38Z

Panini:

Thanks for doing the merge, Scott. It's not simply a matter of copy and paste, or I would have done it myself instead of tagging the articles. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 09:53, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:No worries - I hope the information is correct - I don't know enough about Mexico to tell, but I've fixed a few pretty dodgy country pages today. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 10:14, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Are American style tacos really the best representative picture for the Mexico article? [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 22:59, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:Probably not - especially since they're not mentioned in the text. Should they be removed, or have text or caption increased to create some connection? Please do whatever is best, and if you have a better picture, please add it. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 10:51, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

== Emigration ==

This new paragraph

''== Emigration ==''

''Many Americans (from US) have become angry at tendency for Mexicans to go to the United States, where there is a perception that they are welcome to go and use this healthy economy to make money. Because many aspects of such a culture (such as the common unwillingness to learn or speak English) which are incompatible with American (from US) values, these people are often unwelcome, especially those who immigrate illegally. Groups such as the Minutemen have been active in stopping this influx (sometimes killing them), but it is still a problem with which the US must contend.''

is not in the proper article. This matter concern basically to the United States and ''there'' it should be. Not in an article about Mexico.

--[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 18:53, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm prone to disagree. Remember that Conservapedia seeks to illuminate the American perspective, so it makes sense that such a huge issue should at least be mentioned. To suggest otherwise would imply a bias for those who choose to come to this country illegally.
[[User:ATB|ATB]] 18:51, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

A common unwillingness to learn to speak English? I guess the three years I spent teaching English in Mexico was a fluke. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 20:02, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

I must point out that those were the ones who weren't coming over here. [[User:ATB|ATB]] 10:49, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

== VERY LITTLE ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ==

WHY?

Because, frankly, this site is turning embarrassingly leftist. I'm not sure this is really what was originally intended at all, in fact. The idea that they are unwilling to confront such a huge issue (see my deleted portion of this article) which bluntly threatens the American way of life betrays a soft spot for bleeding heart, socialistic concepts of everybody being exactly the same. Am I the only one who feels this way? [[User:ATB|ATB]] 15:13, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

Are you sure that all illegal aliens are Mexican? Where I live, everyone colmplains about Asians. I believe in northern New England they complain about French Canadians. I think in Florida they complain about the Cubans and Haitians. My impression is that you would like everyone to be exactly the same, i.e. speaking English, same political ideas, same religion, same clothing.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 19:39, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Satrap

2007-07-08T17:07:15Z

Panini:

'''Satraps''' were loyal [[governor]]s established by the [[Persian Empire]] to rule distant lands. They had power to impose [[law]]s and [[tax]]es.

Satraps (Old Persian khšaçapâvâ) were the governors of the satrapies (provinces) of the ancient Achaemenid Empire.

The title satrap is older than the Persian Empire. It is the hellenized form of the word khšaçapâvâ, which in Median means 'protector of the realm' and was used to describe the vassal kings of the Median empire. The satraps had their own court. They were in charge of the civil administration and were commanders of the satrapal levies.

When the office of satrap became hereditary, it became a threat to the central authority of the Great King. Checks were set up to counter this threat. The satrap's secretary, chief financial officer, and the general in charge of the garrison in the citadel of each satrapal capital reported directly to the Great King in person. In addition, the Median and Persian kings sent out inspectors called the "Eyes of the King" to control and supervise their satraps.

[[Category: Ancient History]]

Talk:Xerxes

2007-07-08T17:03:09Z

Panini: New page: I think Ahasuerus could have been Artaxerxes instead of Xerxes.~~~~

I think Ahasuerus could have been Artaxerxes instead of Xerxes.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 13:03, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Human Immunodeficiency Virus

2007-07-08T16:55:57Z

Panini:

Reference section needs to be cleaned up. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 05:55, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
:Entire article could use a little formatting clean-up. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 06:06, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
::This entire article is taken from Wikipedia and contains liberally slanted citations which dangerously and irresponsibly underestimate the transmissability of HIV infection. --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 22:35, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

== Appeal for sources ==

I've been seeking sources about HIV transmissability from reputable Christian scientists that reflect the true risks unprotected sex. I am completely failing, however. --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 23:37, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

I will find you statistics. I should have them up soon.

[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 14:50, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Ok, I added a bunch of transmission risk stats, i hope it's helpful.
BTW, Bill, the religion of the scientist is irrelevant, as long as the information is accurate.
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 15:32, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

I know who you are, Dr. Bauer (assuming it's you) and I know it's important to you, but if you wish to discuss fringe theories please feel free to do it here before adding to the article, that way it can be hashed out first. We may also wish to start a separate page for you. Thanks[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 16:27, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

I see the first paragraph of the article has been vandalized.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 12:55, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Tom Tancredo

2007-07-07T02:00:47Z

Panini:

[[Conservapedia:Manual_of_Style/Politicians]] I recommend the use of that. And to remember that things need to have sources. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:15, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

I believe Tom Tancredo is running for president.[[User:Panini|Panini]] 22:00, 6 July 2007 (EDT)

Satrap

2007-07-01T15:13:38Z

Panini: