Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Digression on UK morality and bad roads)
(Digression on UK morality and bad roads)
Line 288: Line 288:
 
:::Duh, the Democrats didn't just take over the House? The Right didn't just loose power? You're living in la-la land. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:04, 10 November 2018 (EST)
 
:::Duh, the Democrats didn't just take over the House? The Right didn't just loose power? You're living in la-la land. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:04, 10 November 2018 (EST)
 
:::And a Big Duh, [[Angela Merkel]] is not a Leftist, she's a Christian. And she'll be replaced by another [[CDU]] member. And the extreme [[Green Party]] which grew by leaps and bounds recently has a better chance of becoming a coalition partner in any German government before the [[AfD]] ever will. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:13, 10 November 2018 (EST)
 
:::And a Big Duh, [[Angela Merkel]] is not a Leftist, she's a Christian. And she'll be replaced by another [[CDU]] member. And the extreme [[Green Party]] which grew by leaps and bounds recently has a better chance of becoming a coalition partner in any German government before the [[AfD]] ever will. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:13, 10 November 2018 (EST)
 +
::::Democrats won the house due to the failure of the GOP to deliver a better healthcare system after promising over and over to repeal and replace ObamaCare. In an aging population, this was a big mistake. In addition, the me-too movement is currently a fad. But feminism is ultimately a dead end for a political movement because it leads to sub-replacement levels of births for leftists.
 +
 +
::::Brexit and the growth of right-wing populism in Europe helped cause Donald Trump to become elected. As right-wing populism continues to grow in Europe and in the world, it is bound to have a greater effect on the USA.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:26, 10 November 2018 (EST)
  
 
==Florida count==
 
==Florida count==

Revision as of 17:26, 10 November 2018

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal

Archive Index

Time for some good news...

The good news is... in one week we've seen the knockout punch delivered to three Democratic hopefuls...Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booger, and Michael Avenatti. That leaves Kamaltoe Harris the only viable candidate. Some might say Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton, but they don't stand a prayer agsinst the progressive millennial generation who now dominate. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:57, 25 October 2018 (EDT)

This is the Dem's idea of a serious presidential candidate: "Kamala Harris Doesn’t Want Trump To “Come Out Alive” If She Is On An Elevator With Him." PeterKa (talk) 00:58, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
You guys seen the new Trump commercial? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:57, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

“Fake” Bombs

The man suspected of sending a dozen bombs to Trump critics had a van covered in pro-Trump bumper stickers. Still think it’s a hoax? CesarS (talk)|

What's the difference between a "Trump critic" and a "prominent Democrat"? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:15, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Secondly, for a "bomb" to be "a bomb", it must be operational. These were Hollywood props. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:38, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Violence from Democrats has been very widespread in the past three years. There's a difference between this person -- a single person with obvious mental issues who worked as a stripper and who had a long criminal record -- and an entire segment of the American public who are supposed to be sane/normal (and were prior to 2015) but are now engaging in violence and advocating for violence because they hate the president so much, along with strong conservatives and devout conservative Christians (see liberal bigotry, Liberal hate speech). --1990'sguy (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Commie Dems are using this to "level the playing field", as an excuse to bring up Charlotseville and even Gabby Giffords, my God (who was shot by a psychotic leftist in the pre-fake news era, but the details of that incident were never clarified other than that it remains fodder for the anti-gun movement). RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:06, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
This is a pretty good article by Alan Dershowitz: [1] In it, he notes this:
So far, no one has tried to glorify the person responsible for the recent pipe bombs. .... This is different from how some on the left glorified the Weather Underground, Black Panthers other hard-left terrorists. Left-wing lawyers, who would never defend an accused right-wing terrorist, rushed to represent them; prominent leftists contributed to defense funds and attended fundraising parties. Films, books, plays and articles sought to understand the motives of these young murderers.
Years later, Barack Obama befriended Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who had been active members of the Weathermen and supporters of violent terrorism. Both Ayers and Dohrn were invited to teach at major American universities, as was Kathy Boudin, who had served a long prison term for participating in a terrorist-inspired robbery that resulted in the deaths of two policemen and one armored-truck guard and seriously injured a second guard. It is difficult to imagine any American university appointing a right-wing terrorist, even one who had served his term and claimed to be rehabilitated. It is fair to say that public attitudes by some on the left were somewhat sympathetic to left-wing terrorists.
--1990'sguy (talk) 18:51, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Matthew Sheppards back

He was killed over a meth deal gone bad. But the killer took the homophobic defense thinking that would get him off rather than confess to being a dope dealer. Now 20 years later, we get to stand by and witness our children being brainwashed over 20 year old fake news. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:21, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Why No Cesar Sayoc?

Why is there not an article about Cesar Sayoc? Do Conservapedians really have to rely on other news sources with a liberal bias? Why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JLind (talk)

Did you cite Breitbart? What about The New American? Or the Gateway Pundit? There are many conservative news sources we can rely on. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:00, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Wow! Not sure I’d want to admit reading the Gateway Pundit. But seriously, Your three sources have no issue with writing about Sayoc but he is untouchable by Conservapedia? Once again, sad. One other thing, I’d really like to discuss Sayoc in the proper forum, the article I created.--JLind (talk) 18:22, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
This is pretty racist, targeting a Latino who likely has mental problems. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:31, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Huh? I’m targeting? I want to write an article about a prominent event and I’m targeting? I don’t think so. I’m racist? Yeah… Sayoc has mental problems? Do you have a source from a competent doctor who examined the guy? --JLind (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
1) I don't read the Gateway Pundit, since I already read at least 10 different news websites every day (including the first two), but I have nothing against it and it's a strongly conservative source. If you're worried about us relying on left-wing sources, I proved otherwise. However, you thinking it's embarassing to read the Gateway Pundit is revealing on your part.
2) Just because something is newsworthy doesn't mean it has encyclopedic value. The sources I mentioned have articles on many different things that I don't add. As I said, if a longstanding editor/admin thinks he's a noteworthy topic for an encyclopedia, they can revert me and recreate. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:33, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
I agree, admitting to NOT reading the Gateway Pundit is very revealing, in a good way. So you think left-wing bombers, killers and all-a-round creeps are encyclopedic but someone, the alleged bomber, who supports our president, is not? Hmmm…. Fascinating. Am I wrong in requesting that you follow the etiquette rules when editing an article? I’d like to think a Conservapedia administrator would lead by example. [[2]] --JLind (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
No, your comments on the Gateway Pundit (and your comments on Trump and the Deep State) say a lot about your political views.
About the etiquette rules, it states that you should discuss the edits of admins before reverting them -- you failed to do this, both for this page and for the Lady Gaga one. Thanks for linking to the page. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Jim Hoft, the owner of Gateway Pundit, has 111,000 Twitter followers. He is a Top Conservative on Twitter, regardless of your jealous dismissals, while you have zero followers on Twitter (your feed is so bad, that you're still hesitant even to follow yourself). VargasMilan (talk) 11:04, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
JLind: You have two big problems (1) he didn't bomb anything. (2) He's likely mentally imbalanced, and a minority, to boot.
What makes him notable? Cause CNN lied about his actions?
Finally, is this anti-minority xenophobia, implying other Latino migrants might be mentally deranged, as well? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:38, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Yeah, and besides, we don't even know if he actually supports President Trump, anyway. Those pro-Trump stickers look suspiciously fresh ESPECIALLY when attached to a van stationed in Florida for the past week at the very least. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:51, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
The fact Sayoc’s bombs did not explode is not a problem for me. I have no idea if he is mentally imbalanced and I suspect you have no clue either. If you do, please post the evidence. What makes him notable? Gosh, maybe it’s because he is making headlines and causing our president a lot of grief. Just ask him. He’s complaining about how this might affect the election. What CNN lies? Are you accusing me of being xenophobic? I’ll have to discuss this accusation with my friends Rodriguez and Madrid. I’d like to point out I never mentioned anyone being mentally deranged.--JLind (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
(1) his ex-lawyer says he's nuts; {2) CNN lies don't make anyone notable; (3) CNN said it was a bomb, bomb investigators said it was harmless; (4) so are you implying Hispanic's coming North from Honduras might have serial bombers among them? Please stop these racist attacks. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:52, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
So you have nothing from a medical professional that says he is at least mentally unstable? Pity. I’ll ask again, what CNN lies. I have yet to read an article on CNN about the guy, though I’m sure they are at least mentioning him in their articles, unlike another organization. What have I said that would even imply anything about Hispanics or Honduras? Are you responding to the voices in your head or maybe confusing me with someone else? Your groundless accusations of racism are insulting and down-right stupid on your part. Please stop. --JLind (talk) 20:59, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Let's remember, the suspect also proudly identifies himself as a Seminole Indian. This makes the racism charges even more serious. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Personally, I think John Brennan put Sayoc up to it with "artificial memories" developed by Christine Blasey Ford to make him think he was a Trump supporter. But that's just me. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:08, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

I’d ask for evidence but I’m convinced, it’s just you.--JLind (talk) 20:59, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Here's a decent article on this incident: [3] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:55, 30 October 2018 (EDT)

Indictment

Sayoc was not charged with bomb making. He was charged with rigging an "energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction." The alleged "bombs" were not functional. RobSDeep Six the Deep State!

Let’s see, I’ll believe the FBI director, a man appointed by a stable genius. He said Sayoc didn’t have fake devices. I’ll discount the opinion of the one who actually believes in the ‘Deep State’. It’s a no-brainer.--JLind (talk) 20:59, 26 October 2018 (EDT)
Bingo. Wray had to say that cause they couldn't charge him with bomb making. That's why Wray had to call it possession of "energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction" which could be CoffeeMate, as I understand it. That's what caused Mary McCord (DOJ) of Trump-Russia shame to say on ,PBS News Hour tonight,
"this is a case, I think, that has every indication of being a case of domestic terrorism.
And we don't have in the federal criminal code a crime of domestic terrorism by that name. There are other crimes. And I would be interested to see as the investigation proceeds and as the prosecutors at the U.S. attorney's office and the Department of Justice take this to the grand jury whether they might not add some other charges, charges such as use of a weapon of mass destruction, which is a terrorism offense.
It's not labeled domestic terrorism, but it is a terrorism offense. So I think that this is a classic case where, if we had a federal crime of domestic terrorism, this kind of — this kind of a case would be fitting to consider for indictment under that type of a charge."
They can't charge him with a weapon of mass destruction cause it's not a bomb. Here's the indictment. Just cause CNN calls it a bomb don't make it a bomb RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:56, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Cesar Sayoc: First and second generation immigrants do commit substantially more mass killings

Cesar Sayoc is a second generation immigrant.[4] I realize he is not a mass killer, but mailing the type of packages he mailed is not a good idea.

Consider:

"There have been about 34 mass shootings since 2000. Forty-seven percent -- 16 -- were committed by first- and second-generation immigrants, i.e. people who never would have been here but for Teddy Kennedy's 1965 immigration act.

And the immigrant mass shootings have been some of the most spectacular ones, such as Fort Hood and San Bernardino. Two of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history, at Virginia Tech in 2007 and at the Pulse Nightclub in 2016, were committed by first- and second-generation immigrants, i.e., people who were in this country because Teddy was pouting in his room and refused to come out until he got his own legacy."[5]

Liberals/leftists, put the above information in your mass immigration pipes and smoke it!Conservative (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2018 (EDT)

Cesar Sayoc: Failure of the criminal/mental health/immigration systems and society

Jared Kushner had an interview with Van Jones about improving the criminal justice system so it has less recidivism (did a better job of reforming people and lowering their risk of committing another crime).[6]

Cesar Sayoc previously threatened to bomb an electric company. The judge never mandated he be examined by a mental health professional (maybe he had some physically related mental health issue like bipolar or schizophrenia). He had other brushes with the law too. But he also had a mother/sisters that loved him and wanted him to see a mental health professional but he refused. Then later he became estranged from his family and he became a loner. In addition, he did not have a father in terms of raising him.

It seems like Cesar Sayoc was a failure of: the criminal justice system, mental health system and of society in general (America has too much loneliness).

In addition, Cesar Sayoc could have been a failure of America's immigration system. If the immigration were more a merit system, maybe his father would have never been let in America. America should have a more merit based system where the best and brightest are let in as far as a general policy.Conservative (talk) 05:50, 27 October 2018 (EDT)

Probably the results of budget cuts, huh? Or maybe his insurance didn't cover pre-existing mental conditions. Better yet, maybe it was a failure of the church leaving him isolated and not part of a community. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:45, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
There is another possibility. Maybe he was born evil and incorrigible like the devil and no amount of reformation was possible.
Secondly, you don't have as many spree/multiple/serial killers and bombers per capita in Switzerland as you do in the United States. Cultures/societies can make a difference as far as people's character.Conservative (talk) 03:09, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:51, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Europe won't allow Muhammad to be defamed

Was Muhammad a pedophile? Don't ask a European: "Defaming Prophet Muhammed not free expression: ECHR." Europe is not Charlie Hebdo anymore. PeterKa (talk) 09:01, 27 October 2018 (EDT)

European conservatives have known for years that the ECHR and the ECJ are complete jokes. They only exist to advance a globalist/Europhile agenda -- I haven't seen a single decision not advancing these agendas in some way. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:36, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
Honestly, Charlie Hebdo is a joke as well, considering it exists solely to push Voltaire's globalist agenda (and let's face it, he also wanted a globalist agenda like Rousseau did). Pokeria1 (talk) 09:42, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
Charlie Hebdo is a joke -- but this decision will most affect European conservatives who believe in free speech (and we've already seen people like Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders fined because they mocked Islam). Tucker Carlson was interviewing someone on the issue last night who (rightly, I think) pointed out that this decision marks a return to anti-blasphemy laws in Europe that liberals claimed to oppose, though these new religious laws only apply for Islam, of course.
The big question is: the ECHR covers most of Europe, including Poland, Hungary, and Russia. What will they do in response to this? --1990'sguy (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2018 (EDT)

Left-wing rhetoric

Just another reminder that the Left is hypocritical to the extreme when they chastise Trump and other conservatives for somehow escalating their rhetoric: [7] We can't let this fact get lost to the media's narrative. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:20, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

True. Leftist mobs still differs from a lone nutcase, however the issue of political violence from left and right somewhat cancel each other out, although I'd still give an edge to Republicans. And gridlick certainly is no solution to divisions.
Let's face it though, violence and mobs takes a back seat to the migrant caravan and healthcare as the top two issues.
In my opinion, debating who has the most incendiary rhetoric is a sterile issue. The mainstream media can do so, but nobody is listening anymore. They're preaching to the liberal choir, and the more they go on about it, they pursuade independent minded voters they're full of bull. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:34, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
We should look for every opportunity to point out Democrats' only agenda for Blacks is to kill the low unemployment rate, and keep them depressed and dependent on the Democrat plantation. Democrats want to put Blacks back in chains. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:41, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
I can remember all the way back when the Obama regime was ramping up its rhetoric against cops. It inspired a shooting in Dallas and a riot in Ferguson. Obama himself was hanging out with race baiter Al Sharpton. Where was all the media handwringing about presidential rhetoric back then? It is such a dishonest tactic. PeterKa (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2018 (EDT)
Agreed overall, but I'm a bit hesitant as to whether that guy is actually a Trump Supporter. Those bumper stickers looked a bit too fresh ESPECIALLY in Florida weather. They would have shown signs of wear and tear by the time he was caught. More likely than not, he merely posed as a Trump supporter to make the group look bad, sort of like how the KKK "backed" Donald Trump during the election. Pokeria1 (talk) 13:21, 29 October 2018 (EDT)
This makes no sense. Sayoc killed no one. Sayoc couldn't build a bomb if you gave him a diagram. Brower the Trump-hater killed 10 people, and here you two DNC plants are Monday morning quarterbacking about Sayoc. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:06, 29 October 2018 (EDT)

Sick Islamic terrorist pleads guilty; back in winter left bombs inside baskets with stuffed bears along roadway, some detonate, one father hurt

An Islamic terrorist creep in a state nearby our recent fake-bomber's employed, back in winter, his own bomb arsenal to pack explosives into appealing children's toys (as well as some toys without explosives, which might have persuaded some their baskets were all harmless, and that it was safe to approach them) that went off while children were nearby. The baskets also contained pictures of the White House in flames, so it could be an instance of left-wing attacks based, but not solely based, on politics.

His federal charges are:

  • Using, attempting to use and threatening to use weapons of mass destruction;
  • Possession and discharge of a firearm in furtherance of a violent crime;
  • Using an explosive device during the commission of a felony.[1]

VargasMilan (talk) 04:36, 30 October 2018 (EDT)

Terrorism? CNN didn't cover it. You sure it wasn't just a prank? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:31, 30 October 2018 (EDT)

Robert Mueller turns FBI on accusers

According to this story, "Special counsel Robert Mueller has referred to the FBI allegations that women were "offered money" to make "false claims" about him, a spokesman said Tuesday." There is no mention of blackmail in the article. Mueller is apparently siccing the FBI on someone who simply accused him of something. Who knew you could do that? There was a group of women who accused Trump of sexual misconduct just before the 2016 election. It turned out they were paid off by Hillary donors.[8] When a special counsel claims powers even a president doesn't have, something is out of whack. Constitutionally speaking, Mueller is only an "inferior officer." PeterKa (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2018 (EDT)

MSM misrepresentation and false attacks about Steve King

In the last few days, the media has been outright hysterical over U.S. Rep. Steve King. It seems like the thing they are most upset about is the fact that he went to Austria and did an interview with a conservative publication affiliated with a certain political party -- this attack really annoys me because they show themselves to be clueless about the party/organization they are criticizing.

Here's what the media says about it the publication/political party:

In response, King stated that if this party/publication were in the U.S., they would belong in the GOP based on their political positions.

Is King right? Let's actually take a look at this party and this "former neo-Nazi" leader -- rather than blindly repeat the MSM -- to find out....

The party is the Austrian Freedom Party -- a look at the party's platform reveals that it is extremely pro-Israel (something Austria's establishment Chancellor has agreed with[9]), supporting moving Austria's embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Additionally, the party leans conservative on social issues, but it's not "hardline", leaning pro-life and opposing gun control, but also opposing the death penalty. Also, it supports remaining in the EU -- a very moderate position for a so-called "far-right" party. The party supports limited government, lower taxes, and free speech rights -- completely inconsistent with the socialist totalitarianism of the Nazis. King is right that they would fit in with the GOP (and I mean by the latter's Paul Ryan/Ted Cruz/etc. standards), and they might actually be considered moderates within the GOP.

What about the party being founded by a former SS officer? First, at the time, there were many people in Germany and Austria (as well as other countries, such as Hungary) who had once been in the SS or Nazi Party, and its founder did not take part in the Holocaust (according to one of my college professors -- no fan of national socialism -- people, including some non-Germans, joined the SS for other reasons in addition to Jews). Second, the Freedom Party changed its ideology over the years -- it originally had a strong liberal faction and sometimes formed governing coalitions with the left-wing Social Democrats. However, it later began becoming more conservative, kicking out the liberal faction and aligning with the establishment-conservative ÖVP.

Lastly, who is so-called "former neo-Nazi Heinz-Christian Strache"?[10] He's the Vice-Chancellor of Austria, a member of a party (the Freedom Party) which currently controls several important national security-related departments, including defense, interior (meaning police and immigration), and foreign affairs, among others. And they call this party -- currently occupying very important positions in the government, aligned with an establishment party and getting along well -- a "neo-Nazi" party? Give me a break -- it's maddening when the media and the establishment misrepresent pretty much everything about a conservative political party and its leader. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:29, 31 October 2018 (EDT)

Of coarse. Anyone who is not a Social Democrat (i.e. Marxist) has to be exterminated. This is how it's done. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:42, 31 October 2018 (EDT)

Redundancy = overkill

MPR reads, "from his fellow atheists, the atheist Stephen Fry." By the word "fellow," we already know Fry is an atheist. The reader is left with two impressions: (1} the writer thinks you are stupid in case you missed the point; or (2) the writer is stupid in not realizing the readers aren't that stupid and don't need a point hammered home as such.

Either way, it sounds amatuerish, and begs the readers patience. In writing, less can be more. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:09, 31 October 2018 (EDT)

Let's continue our grammar lesson. In the above example, "atheist" is being used as a pejorative in its second use. It is not being used to inform, but to insult, which tells us more about the writer and underlying content than the content itself. The intent is not to persuade, but to disparage.
By offering a disputed definition for a term - atheist in this example - whether the term is an insult or core set of beliefs, is an invitation to a circular argument. You've already declared your intention is to neither inform or persuade.
The misuse of these terms is common throughout Conservapedia, the insertion of atheist or liberal as a pejorative or insult rather than having any information baring value. In the current political climate, this bares sitting up and taking notice.
Many liberals are WalkAway from the Democratic party, particularly Blacks. This does not automatically imply they have converted to conservatism. At this historic moment, with this historic opportunity President Trump has created for us, we should cease immediately disparaging the term "liberal," and learn to identify the fine distinctions between "liberal" and "progressive." We should welcome liberals with open arms, and ostracize intolerant single-party progressives, socialists, and Marxists.
In keeping with the main theme of "less is more," the floor is now open for discussion. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:47, 1 November 2018 (EDT)
Illustration: progressive, socialists, and Marxists are the "crazy crazy crazy Democrats" Claire McCaskill referenced who are the dominant force of the Democrat party. "Traditional liberals" are allies of Republicans who believe in two-party democracy. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:39, 2 November 2018 (EDT)
4 things: 1) Due to the USA midterm elections coming up and the public's waning interest in atheism (see also: Decline of the atheist movement), I decided to remove the post before I saw your feedback. 2) Your point about excess verbiage in the sentence was legitimate complaint. 3) I did not use the term atheist with malice in the sentence and it was merely a descriptor. The thought of doing so did not even enter into my mind. 4) Technically, since the group giving Stephen Fry the award was made up of atheists/agnostics, the term "fellow atheists" should not have been used (although the group is called Atheist Alliance of America, the group's about page on their website indicates they serve "nonbelievers".[11] Because some nonbelievers are atheists or agnostics in this particular context, this is the main reason I used the term "atheist" to describe Stephen Fry).Conservative (talk) 17:13, 1 November 2018 (EDT)
Your excess verbiage above doesn't address the points of grammar and information. A writer, an effective writer, must view the world through the eyes of the reader or audience. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:45, 1 November 2018 (EDT)

Would you agree with the basic premise - The over use of the terms "liberal" and "atheist" as pejoratives becomes counterproductive at some point? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:58, 1 November 2018 (EDT)

Here's my point: calling a Democrat a liberal has as much impact as calling a Republican a racist. They just brush it off, and the only negative impact is on the namecaller. We must recognize there are good liberals and bad liberals. Good liberals believe in democracy, tolerance, and a two party system. Bad liberals vote Democrat. Republicans have much in common and an alliance with many liberals.

Such is the state of the discussion today. We don't live in an advanced civilized world. Political divisions today exist on a primitive basis - authoritarian single-party fascists on the one hand, and those with respect for democracy, tolerence, and human rights on the other. Because of the reality of the modern world Republicans and conservatives must form an alliance with "traditional" liberals. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:17, 1 November 2018 (EDT)

I had a tough English professor for English 201. I was also a writing tutor for a major university. I don't believe in the overuse/unnecessary use of terms in one's writing. But my writing could be improved and I recently purchased the books Elements of Style by Strunk & White and On Writing Well by William Zinsser. And I definitely should have worded the main page right post more effectively. By the way, in your post above, you wrote "over use" instead of the grammatically correct "overuse" (see: Overuse - Merriam-Webster dictionary).Conservative (talk) 18:20, 1 November 2018 (EDT)
You don't need to defend yourself personally. That's beside the point.
Now, stop posting personal information and address the main point: Would you agree with the basic premise - The over use of the terms "liberal" and "atheist" as pejoratives becomes counterproductive at some point? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:35, 1 November 2018 (EDT)
I did address your question. I wrote: "I don't believe in the overuse/unnecessary use of terms in one's writing."
Secondly, the terms liberal/atheist do have a toxic quality - especially the word atheist (see: Democrats may have turned left but they still fear the L-word, CNN, 2016 and Views on atheists). But it is largely the misbehavior/incompetence of these two groups that has caused the toxicity. For example, please see Atheism and mass murder and Atheist population and immorality. So it is not surprising that opponents of these groups tar their opponents with the labels liberal/atheist. If Donald Trump were to run for president against Bernie Sanders, chances are that Donald Trump and/or his supporters would point out that Sanders is an atheist since a great deal of Americans would not vote for an atheist (Many Americans have indicated that they would not vote for an atheist in surveys). That's politics. And politics ain't bean bag as the political pundits say. Nonetheless, I stick by my statement that "I don't believe in the overuse/unnecessary use of terms in one's writing." And this principle applies to one's speech as well. Conservative (talk) 21:48, 1 November 2018 (EDT)
Analysis: Premise: Misuse of the term "atheist" is an invitation to a circular argument.
Response: the terms liberal/atheist do have a toxic quality.
Per CP's article circular reasoning, "Circular reasoning is a form of proof by assertion, often used by Atheists and evolutionists in which one uses a conclusion of an argument as a premise to that same argument." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:14, 2 November 2018 (EDT)
I came up with the term "scorntheist" or in Greek "periphrontheism" to describe 1. militant atheists, 2. anti-theists and 3. satanists.
But Andy conveyed it was important when Ben Carson in August 2015 rebuked the liberal media and dismissed the "anchor-babies" controversy as "silly", saying “We need to talk about the actual issue and stop getting pulled off into the weeds and saying, 'you can't use this term, you can't use that term.'" So I don't know how he'd feel about editors actually coining a new word, especially one that potentially would appear on main page right. VargasMilan (talk) 04:44, 2 November 2018 (EDT)
Q. Would you agree the over usage of the terms "liberal" and "atheist" as pejoratives becomes counterproductive at some point?
A. "I don't believe in the overuse/unnecessary use of terms in one's writing."
That doesn't answer the question. Let's try it this way: Would you agree when an author frequently uses the terms "liberal" and "atheist" as attack words, it can sow confusion among some readers who do not regard those words as pejoratives? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:38, 2 November 2018 (EDT)

Trump does it again

Trump approval hits 50%.jpg

This picture shows a meeting Trump held yesterday before a White House dinner where Trump invited the deep state back to their former workplace. But I think they may have regretted attending when Trump said the only reason he was having the dinner was to celebrate that his approval numbers had broken 50% and hit 51%. They don't look like they had much of an appetite after having heard that. VargasMilan (talk) 16:58, 2 November 2018 (EDT)

Another victim of the public school system?

"I think it's the massive reputation blow skepticism and rationalism itself has taken over the coarse of the last... I don't know, let's say 4 years... The intellectual clout of rationalism has suffered dramatically, look at the way people talk about skeptics today versus 5 years ago." - Editor of atheist wiki

The correct spelling of the word "coarse" in the above passage is "course".

Another atheist who was indoctrinated in a poorly run public school system? See also: Atheist indoctrination.Conservative (talk) 23:41, 2 November 2018 (EDT)

I dunno; what's the difference between a coarse brick a brick course? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:59, 3 November 2018 (EDT)

Brooklyn graffiti artist was left wing anti-Semite

Hey, left-wing Jew haters! The media is playing the anti-Semitism card against Trump this week, so keep it down: "Brooklyn, NY - "Kill All Jews" Graffiti Suspect, Responsible For Other Synagogue Fires, Arrested, Intern For Former City Council Speaker." The Dems are still the party of Linda Sarsour, Louis Farrakhan, and Al Sharpton. Israelis know who their friends are: "Poll: Jewish Israelis Love Trump." PeterKa (talk) 10:07, 4 November 2018 (EST)

I guess you didn't read that Linda Sarsour now wants to lead a movement to fight anti-semitism. VargasMilan (talk) 06:55, 6 November 2018 (EST)
Statement from the Anti Defamation League: "We have vigorously opposed efforts like the Boycott Divestment and Sanction (BDS) movement, which she supports and we oppose her stance that one cannot be simultaneously a feminist and pro-Israel." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:02, 6 November 2018 (EST)
That's about as tough as a liberal group can get on leftist bigots nowadays. It's so rare for anyone on the left to challenge the orthodoxy that only conservatives can be racist. PeterKa (talk) 17:24, 6 November 2018 (EST)

"Stealth chairman" Chuck Grassley goes further in his preparations to avenge abuses committed in Kavanaugh hearing

“Indeed, the evidence appears to support the position that Julie Swetnick and Mr. Avenatti criminally conspired to make materially false statements to the Committee and obstruct the Committee’s investigation.”

— Chairman Chuck Grassley, Senate Judiciary
VargasMilan (talk) 07:08, 6 November 2018 (EST)

He wrote up her sworn statement and had her sign it - again Avenatti exploiting women. He made materially false and misleading statements to Committee Counsel in emails. Like Michael Cohen and Bill Clinton, he's likely gonna loose his law license. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:09, 6 November 2018 (EST)

ftvbw: for the very Big Win

I'd hate to be your boy once those subpoenas start flying in. Still, I can't help but admire the bone-headed chutzpah that compels him to try and take a victory lap beforehand. JohnZ (talk) 16:30, 7 November 2018 (EST)

The GOP did very well in the Senate. Not only will they likely increase their seats in the chamber (not including the undecided races, they're currently equal to what they have now), but they got rid of RINOs like Flake and Corker, replacing them with stronger conservatives. That means it's easier to confirm originalist judges and confirm conservative executive branch nominees.
Considering how poorly the incumbent party usually does in the first midterm election of a presidency, it's extremely accurate to consider this a GOP victory. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:34, 7 November 2018 (EST)
Rosenstein just lost control of the Mueller probe with the assumption of power by Acting AG Matthew Whitaker. Rosenstein was ineffective anyway, seeing that his FISA clearance has been suspended since he came under IG Michael Horowitz's investigation for Obama FISA abuse. Fortunately, Whitaker also inherits 61,000 sealed indictments, which certainly include the people who think they're going to impeach and try Trump. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:51, 7 November 2018 (EST)
Only crazy people believe QAnon, Rob. It's Pizzagate with clown shoes on. JohnZ (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2018 (EST)
I said nothing about Qanon. Now, how would you explain the existence of 61,000 sealed indictments since John Huber's appointment? It's an indisputable fact. Even WaPo just reported two hours ago, Trump just seized control of the Mueller investigation.
I've been telling my Democratic friends they better pray the Democrats do not win the House. Next comes the fight between Pelosi (who engineered takeover of the House) and progressive Democratic Socialists peeing their pants for impeachment. Pelosi will wisely tell them, as she did in 2007, that impeachment is off the table. If snot-nose punk millennial socialists think they can overthrow Pelosi this time, I say good luck. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:32, 7 November 2018 (EST)
Meanwhile, back in the real world... JohnZ (talk) 19:11, 7 November 2018 (EST)
Thanks. It's a very interesting analysis that, honestly, confirms some of the suspicions I had about methodology, which is why I never associated myself with the Qanon movement. But if you read this analysis closely, it's inconclusive as well. It debunks Q's methodology, but doesn't do much beyond that. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:35, 7 November 2018 (EST)
Sundance has a good take on it RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:49, 7 November 2018 (EST)
No worries. Your link agrees with wmerthon's analysis, describing the claim re. 60-odd thousand sealed indictments as "pure unmitigated nonsense". Your last two sentences, though, suggest you still think there might be something to this.
wmerthon takes pains to stress his analysis isn't definitive (i.e. categorical proof), but that doesn't mean it's inconclusive. He's stress tested Q's claim of thousands of new sealed indictments at several key data points, and found it to be without merit each time.
How many rancid spoonfuls does a man have to swallow before deciding the meat in his stew is off? JohnZ (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Granted, carting George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Obama off to Gitmo seems a forlorn hope, we can't dismiss it as a contingency. And given everything Trump critics say about Trump, how can it be ignored?
I'm not sure the Huber probe is limited to McCabe, either.
There are however some apparent differences in how the numbers were counted beginning at some point in 2017, which is difficult to explain. And wmerthon explains the problem again. PACER is a pay wall. He said he himself spent $150, but needed about $400 to create a reasonable sample.
So yes, I agree. The 10 day tribunals and firing squads seems far fetched. But much depends on how Democrats behave now. After what they did to Tucker Carlson last nite, the nation needs to be ware. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:47, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Update: User:Sundance of theconservativetreehouse posted that Qanon is giving the Democrats ammunition for impeachment by claiming Matthew Whitaker is part of some larger plan to undermine the Deep state; simultaneously with Sundance's criticism, Praying Medic has suspended his YouTube activity. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:05, 10 November 2018 (EST)
If there's a lesson to be learned from the behavior of Democrats concerning accountability in government, it's that ignoring Congressional subpoenas is pretty cool! Down to earth! I'd worry more about those Department of Justice subpoenas. VargasMilan (talk) 17:51, 7 November 2018 (EST)
(Nota bene: The above is rote sarcasticul. Obama's executive branch higher-ups (Eric Holder, Lois Lerner) and his crony capitalists (Solyndra) etc. dodged Congressional subpoenas for the eight years of his tenure. There is a reason why Department of Justice (an executive Department whose members are now hired by Trump) subpoenas towards suspected Democratic mis-users of political power are more immune from the Democrats' political strategy of law-ignoring dismissal as well as their smear campaigns towards those who help to move towards prosecution, dismissal or censure [through making use of these subpoenas] the most skillfully.
And that is that the Department of Justice officers have already fairly low concern about avoiding "smearable" bold moves (due to a lack of a need for re-election—being appointed officers) and especially so early in the election cycle where memories will not be as fresh two years after when their elected supervisors are up for the voters' re-endorsement. And for one last reason: carrying out law-enforcement is, and is perceived to be, their specialty and not just one job among many that pulls away from the performance of other jobs. VargasMilan (talk) 03:50, 9 November 2018 (EST))
I have two words for anyone who thinks the Dems can use the House to cramp Trump's style: Lois Lerner. For a government official to plead the fifth is to admit criminal wrongdoing. Yet there was no criminal investigation.
If you want to know what happened at Benghazi, read 13 House by Mitchell Zuckoff, not the congressional testimony. Why? Because the testimony consists of hours and hours of Obama's people shamelessly stonewalling.
House Republicans held Eric Holder in contempt in 2012.[12] It was unprecedented, but nobody noticed. In short, Obama has provided plenty of precedent to ignore the House. Trump, kick the House Dems hard. No one deserves it more. Republican gains in the Senate mean Trump can run the country without the House. All Mueller can do now is write his report -- and Whitaker can make appropriate adjustments to that. PeterKa (talk) 18:47, 7 November 2018 (EST)
I'm sure the word went out today from Whitaker to Mueller to wrap it up. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:00, 7 November 2018 (EST)
I see a lot of commentary bemoaning the decline of the House from the glorious state that the founders supposedly intended for it. But I assume the founders had the Roman Republic in mind when they designed the U.S. constitution. That is to say, the president was seen as a consul governing with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. Meanwhile, the people would be blowing off steam in the House, successor to Rome's Popular Assembly. PeterKa (talk) 19:52, 7 November 2018 (EST)
It's true, the U.S House isn't as powerful as the UK House of Commons, which is involved I everything from taxing lap dances, disbursing highway funds, to authorizing troops in Libya. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:08, 7 November 2018 (EST)

Digression on UK morality and bad roads

JohnZ, deep down you know that you would love to be "our boy" Donald Trump. If you were Trump, you would be a billionaire and the most powerful man in the world. You would also be an American citizen rather than be a citizen of a country being overrun with Muslim extremism and facing a road repair crisis (see: United Kingdom's road repair crisis). Señor British, Secular Leftist, even Chile has better roads than Britain![13] Olé! Olé! Olé!

The only downside to being Donald Trump is that you would be much older and missing some hair.

By the way, have you seen Olé! Olé! Olé! Atheist style!. You definitely should take a look at it.Conservative (talk) 12:11, 9 November 2018 (EST)

Why can't you stick to the subject? The subject is "our boy," not JohnZ. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:34, 9 November 2018 (EST)
I am sticking to the root issue. One of the main reasons why the left dislikes conservatives/right is due to envy. Many of the "poor" in the Western World have air conditioning, cable television, publicly paid medical services, etc. They want wealth distribution due to envy not due to necessity. Deep down JohnZ is envious of Donald Trump.Conservative (talk) 16:01, 9 November 2018 (EST)
We're not discussing the left, or conservatives, or what we think another editor's ideology is, or potholes in Great Britain. We're discussing Trump's victory lap. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:51, 9 November 2018 (EST)
JohnZ said, "I'd hate to be your boy once those subpoenas start flying in." The truth is that he is envious of Donald Trump and I pointed out some of the likely reasons he is envious of Trump.Conservative (talk) 00:44, 10 November 2018 (EST)
You did not. You went on personal rant about God knows what and attacked another editor personally. You never once considered or addressed the point JohnZ brought up: the actions of a new Congress. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:50, 10 November 2018 (EST)

There are certainly British who have the traditional British virtues such as industriousness, politeness, thrift, etc., but the sad truth is that Britain/France/Germany/Sweden/Netherlands/etc. are going to have big problems due to Muslim immigration. In addition, the Brits have had a negative cultural influence due to Darwinism/atheism. And I see Britain continuing to see societal decline due to various factors. This is a sad state of affairs given that Britain gave us the Magna Carta, the industrial revolution, Pilgrim's Progress, Shakespeare, King James Bible, etc.

After all is said and done, I see JohnZ's main page talk posts as rather uninformative in terms of the big picture. Seeing that he is a British atheist and leftist/liberal, this is not entirely surprising. Britain, the secular left and the atheist movement are in decline (see also: Decline of the atheist movement and Desecularization and Decline of the secular left).Conservative (talk) 08:19, 10 November 2018 (EST)

Face facts: there's much you can learn from the Left. While a bunch of atheist community organizers are busy stealing elections nationwide from Godly people, you wanna discuss UK potholes. Why? Because conservatives by nature don't lend themselves easily to cooperation in organized groups. Adolph Hitler repudiates Marxism in a chapter of Mein Kampf entitled, The Strong Man Stands Mightiest Alone. You make that point repeatedly with your off-topic rants. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:48, 10 November 2018 (EST)

I don't believe that there is much I can learn from the left. Their cultures are largely crumbling (Breakdown of the family, increasing levels of sovereign debt, falling national IQs, sub-replacment levels of births, etc.). Western leftists have high rates of mental health problems - especially among the young. And in a time of the state losing power through much of the world (greater difficulty in indoctrinating people into their narrative in an internet age; Fourth-generation warfare, funding problems as far as a welfare state, etc. etc), leftism is probably going to be less and less relevant as it derives much of its power from the state. On top of this, leftists are often humorless and bitter sore losers when they lose power or are losing power.

China might turn into a great power and part of the reason is its rapid Christianization.

If I want to learn much, the Bible/God and Christians/businessmen are far better sources. One the reasons why I like Donald Trump is that he is a businessman. Conservative (talk) 16:52, 10 November 2018 (EST)

The Left is organized, the Right is not. That's why it's so easy for them to steal elections after they imposed internet censorship and shadow banning of conservatives, making it difficult if not impossible to get information about what they are doing this very moment.
I just read they think they can up the number of House seats from 29 to 42 before it's over.
There's only two issues at the moment: (1) monopoly control and censorship of the internet; (2) election rigging. Your ramblings about potholes, China, and atheism amount to nothing unless you get focused. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:43, 10 November 2018 (EST)
It's easy for the left to steal elections? In 2015, The Guardian published an article entitled Only a third of the EU is governed by the centre-left. Angela Merkel said they is not running for re-election and she is rapidly losing power due the growth of right-wing populism. In Brazil, right-wing populism is seeing rapid growth. Right-wing populism is growing in Latin America. Right-wing populism and nationalism are rapidly growing in Europe and in the world at large.
As far as communists, the Soviet Union collapsed and the Chinese communists have been unable to stop the rapid Christianization of their country. Conservative (talk) 17:54, 10 November 2018 (EST)
leftism is probably going to be less and less relevant as it derives much of its power from the state. On top of this, leftists are often humorless and bitter sore losers when they lose power or are losing power.
Duh, the Democrats didn't just take over the House? The Right didn't just loose power? You're living in la-la land. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:04, 10 November 2018 (EST)
And a Big Duh, Angela Merkel is not a Leftist, she's a Christian. And she'll be replaced by another CDU member. And the extreme Green Party which grew by leaps and bounds recently has a better chance of becoming a coalition partner in any German government before the AfD ever will. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:13, 10 November 2018 (EST)
Democrats won the house due to the failure of the GOP to deliver a better healthcare system after promising over and over to repeal and replace ObamaCare. In an aging population, this was a big mistake. In addition, the me-too movement is currently a fad. But feminism is ultimately a dead end for a political movement because it leads to sub-replacement levels of births for leftists.
Brexit and the growth of right-wing populism in Europe helped cause Donald Trump to become elected. As right-wing populism continues to grow in Europe and in the world, it is bound to have a greater effect on the USA.Conservative (talk) 18:26, 10 November 2018 (EST)

Florida count

Even if the count, or rather miscount, shows that DeSantis gets less votes than Gillum, he has lawyers at the ready to litigate against the failures of two counties to respect Florida election law designed to prevent voter fraud.

In similar situations across the country, all benefiting Democrats, vast statistical unlikelihoods of the last-counted ballots cast in Democrats' favor were complained about, but ignored by state attorneys general appointed by or elected by Democrats.

This time it seems like the Republicans are prepared and will be able to explain to a judge with jurisdiction in the matter the statistical unlikelihood of the late-counted votes (which really does reach ridiculous levels) without some partisan Democrat attorney general slowwalking the count and playing as dumb or slack-minded about the science of statistical analysis as if it had just been invented the year before, and nobody knows what the science does. VargasMilan (talk) 09:10, 9 November 2018 (EST)

Marc Elias, who paid Christopher Steele for the pee-pee memo to try to tamper with the 2016 presidential election, and later overthrow Trump, is representing the Democrats' as their premier "election lawyer." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:01, 10 November 2018 (EST)