Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Even Laura Loomer's Twitter fan club page removed from Twitter after she takes her protest #StoptheBias to front of Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey's house)
(JohnZ's "Kurdish" communist professional victims)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
[[Talk:Main Page/Archive index|Archive Index]]
 
[[Talk:Main Page/Archive index|Archive Index]]
  
 +
==Trump Polls 2020==
 +
Can someone add this to In The News: President Trump is SURGING in polls in battleground states
 +
https://firehousestrategies.com/analysis/december_2019_battleground_survey/ Trumpslide 2020!
  
== Releasing the Mueller report ==
+
==Who will win the Democrat presidential primary? ==
 +
:''See also [[2020 presidential election]]
 +
{| class="wikitable sortable"  style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
 +
|+Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee
 +
|+Who will win?
 +
|+
 +
|-
 +
! colspan="3" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" |
 +
! colspan="10" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" | Chance of becoming<br>Democratic nominee
 +
|-
 +
!class=unsortable|Candidate
 +
!<font size="-2">CA<br>ND<br>.<br>SO<br>RT
 +
!class=unsortable|Home<br>state
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>June<br>26<br>8:57<br>pm<br>EDT
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Mon-<br>day,<br>Jul.<br>29,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Mon-<br>day,<br>Aug.<br>26,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Tues-<br>day,<br>Oct.<br>1,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Mon-<br>day<br>Oct.<br>28,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>4,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>11,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>18,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>25,<br>2019
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|V. Pres [[Joe Biden]]
 +
|{{invi|Bid}}
 +
|align="center"|DE
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|28.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|20.2%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|23.6%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|18.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|19.2%
 +
|align="right"|19.6%
 +
|align="right"|20.4%
 +
|align="right"|21.5%
 +
|align="right"|22.0%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Michael Bloomberg]]
 +
|{{invi|Blo}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right"|
 +
|align="right"|5.1%
 +
|align="right"|2.9%
 +
|align="right"|7.3%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Pete Buttigieg]]
 +
|{{invi|But}}
 +
|align="center"|IN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|11.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|8.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|6.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|9.8%
 +
|align="right"|14.3%
 +
|align="right"|12.2%
 +
|align="right"|16.4%
 +
|align="right"|17.4%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tulsi Gabbard]]
 +
|{{invi|Gab}}
 +
|align="center"|HI
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|2.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.2%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|0.7%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kamala Harris]]
 +
|{{invi|Har}}
 +
|align="center"|CA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|12.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|27.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|10.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.8%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.2%
 +
|align="right"|1.0%
 +
|align="right"|2.1%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|[[Amy Klobuchar]]
 +
|{{invi|Klo}}
 +
|align="center"|MN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.6%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.0%
 +
|align="right"|1.5%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|2.0%
 +
|align="right"|1.7%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Bernie Sanders]]
 +
|{{invi|San}}
 +
|align="center"|VT
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|11.2%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|13.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.5%
 +
|align="right"|12.1%
 +
|align="right"|12.7%
 +
|align="right"|12.2%
 +
|align="right"|11.5%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Elizabeth Warren]]
 +
|{{invi|War}}
 +
|align="center"|MA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|15.9%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|21.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|31.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|46.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|43.7%
 +
|align="right"|33.1%
 +
|align="right"|32.0%
 +
|align="right"|23.0%
 +
|align="right"|18.9%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sec'y [[Hillary Clinton]]
 +
|{{invi|Cli}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|2.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|6.1%
 +
|align="right"|5.4%
 +
|align="right"|4.1%
 +
|align="right"|5.6%
 +
|align="right"|5.3%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|[[Andrew Yang]]
 +
|{{invi|Yan}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|3.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|3.0%
 +
|align="right"|3.4%
 +
|align="right"|3.5%
 +
|align="right"|3.3%
 +
|align="right"|3.1%
 +
|}
  
The ''Washington Post'' is getting antsy about the Mueller report: "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sally-yates-william-barr-should-release-the-full-mueller-port-as-soon-as-possible/2019/03/29/32f5e6d2-523 William Barr Should Release the Full Mueller Report As Soon As Possible]." Hey, what's the rush? The media was only too happy to wait three years for Obama to release his long-form birth certificate. The report can be redacted to conform to DOJ regulations and released in due course. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:33, 30 March 2019 (EDT)
+
{| class="wikitable sortable"  style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
:Obama never released his long-form birth certificate document. No document expert ever examined the so-called document either. There were some things posted on the internet by the Barack "you can keep your doctor and health care plan" Obama camp, but what was posted was disputed (see: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j741EGH-1yI New Problems Surface on Obama's Fake Birth Certificate!] and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpXcNRqDxYc Mike Zullo Connects Former Intelligence Officials to Obama Birth Certificate, Phony Narrative]).
+
|+Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee
 +
|+Who will win?
 +
|+
 +
|-
 +
! colspan="3" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" |
 +
! colspan="8" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" | Twitter followers
 +
|-
 +
!class=unsortable|Candidate
 +
!<font size="-2">CA<br>ND<br>.<br>SO<br>RT
 +
!class=unsortable|Home<br>state
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Accts<br>as of<br>June<br>29
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>July<br>30
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>Aug<br>26
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Sep<br>16
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>Oct<br>1
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Oct<br>16
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Nov<br>1
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Nov<br>18
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|V. Pres [[Joe Biden]]
 +
|{{invi|Bid}}
 +
|align="center"|DE
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|&nbsp;&nbsp;03.6M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+19,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+64,000
 +
|align="right"|+36,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+45,000
 +
|align="right"|+98,000
 +
|align="right"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+27,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Cory Booker]]
 +
|{{invi|Boo}}
 +
|align="center"|NJ
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|04.4M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+28,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+39,000
 +
|align="right"|+12,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+9,000
 +
|align="right"|+12,000
 +
|align="right"|+16,000
 +
|align="right"|+6,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Pete Buttigieg]]
 +
|{{invi|But}}
 +
|align="center"|IN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|01.2M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+72,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+101,000
 +
|align="right"|+80,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+26,000
 +
|align="right"|+30,000
 +
|align="right"|+34,000
 +
|align="right"|+34,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tulsi Gabbard]]
 +
|{{invi|Gab}}
 +
|align="center"|HI
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|00.6M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+34,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+118,000
 +
|align="right"|+25,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+27,000
 +
|align="right"|+27,000
 +
|align="right"|+141,000
 +
|align="right"|+11,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kamala Harris]]
 +
|{{invi|Har}}
 +
|align="center"|CA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|03.6M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+245,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+119,000
 +
|align="right"|+56,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+61,000
 +
|align="right"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+32,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Beto O'Rourke]]
 +
|{{invi|O'R}}
 +
|align="center"|TX
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|01.4M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+4,000</s>
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+116,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+44,000</s>
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+24,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+22,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+13,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Bernie Sanders]]
 +
|{{invi|San}}
 +
|align="center"|VT
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|17.8M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+134,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+264,000
 +
|align="right"|+136,400
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+93,000
 +
|align="right"|+140,000
 +
|align="right"|+146,000
 +
|align="right"|+108,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Elizabeth Warren]]
 +
|{{invi|War}}
 +
|align="center"|MA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|07.8M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+225,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+273,000
 +
|align="right"|+137,400
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+137,000
 +
|align="right"|+182,000
 +
|align="right"|+107,000
 +
|align="right"|+70,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sec'y [[Hillary Clinton]]
 +
|{{invi|Cli}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|24.7M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+316,000
 +
|align="right"|+137,500
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+123,000
 +
|align="right"|+152,000
 +
|align="right"|+171,000
 +
|align="right"|+83,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Andrew Yang
 +
|{{invi|Yan}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|00.5M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right"|+119,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+51,000
 +
|align="right"|+39,000
 +
|align="right"|+29,000
 +
|}
  
:Given what was posted on the internet and Obama's track record of telling falsehoods and engaging in nefarious behavior, it would be foolish to believe what was posted on the internet was a copy of Obama's long-form birth certificate.  
+
===Nov. 18===
 +
Warren's 10 point swings show how unstable the situation is; Biden's firming up is a circling of wagons by the pro-impeachment crowd (a whole 1.5% of Democrats); Booty-boy is the darling of Millenials, CNN & MSNBC; all of this also is exposes the anti-Asian racism prevalent among Democrats and media. If Klobuchar sticks around long enough, she may have her 15 minutes of fame at some point.  
  
:On top of this, the mainstream press certainly cannot be trusted to cover the Obama birth certificate matter. The mainstream press totally botched their coverage of the 2016 presidential election and then subsequently pushed a tin foil hat conspiracy theory of Trump-Russia collusion for 2 years at full throttle. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:34, 30 March 2019 (EDT)
+
Bottomline: What we're seeing in the Democratic party is Blacks getting a little too uppity since the election of Barack Obama and are now being put back in their place by the top white frontrunners. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:18, 23 November 2019 (EST)
::Given what happened in 2016 and subsequently, I am going to avoid reading the mainstream press as much as possible. And I know many people are now rightfully avoiding reading the mainstream press. Here is an interesting article: [https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/11353-email-newsletters-drive-engagement.html As Trust in Online Media Drops, Email Newsletters Drive Engagement].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:43, 30 March 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Releasing the report goes against Departmental policy - this is after all what got Comey fired. They're not supposed to add to the innuendo about a person who has been cleared in an investigation. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:41, 31 March 2019 (EDT)
+
::::But Trump didn't release his tax returns, so he ''owes'' us some information.  Trump isn't cool like Obama, so his behavior needs to be scrutinized by providing us this information ''one! last! time!'', or it ''proves''...that he's ''afraid''.  And liberals would totally not cherry-pick the information to use out-of-context chunks to harass Trump with, because they are sorry when this happened with other investigations in the recent past and will respect the special prosecutor this time.  Really really sorry!  This time it's different!  Who's going to pay the consequences if it does happen?  Because you can't sue members of the government when they're carrying out their tasks?  Don't look at me! Wow, look at the time! Sorry, gotta go! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 16:45, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
Watch my man di Genova [https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/439627-informal-trump-adviser-says-Barr-is-one-of-the-finest-lawyers-this-country-has-ever-produced clothesline, bodyslam, and bulldog a commie lib millennial Democrat punk journalist]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:28, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Trump's legitimate ''quid pro quo''==
  
== Media turns on Biden ==
+
It's already been shown by Trump's transcript, or rather, actually ''reading'' the transcript, that there was no ''quid pro quo'' offered for information about Joe Biden's family, but it wasn't always clear whether there was one offered for information about collusion on the part of business and government entities from the Ukraine that was applied ''weeks after'' Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian president.  It was already established that President Obama, the DNC and some Democratic Senators asked the Ukraine to investigate Trump.
  
If you go by the polls, Biden is the Democratic frontrunner and Bernie is his only serious competition. It's all a bit unreal in that both men are clearly too old to take on an eight-year job. The media wants a woman or a minority, preferable both. Now Biden has been metooed. See "[https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/03/the-knives-are-out-for-biden.php The Knives are out for Biden]" and "[https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/joe-biden-democratic-party-2020-presidential-candidacy/ Joe Biden Is Done]." Given all the videos out there of Biden feeling up various women, the amazing thing is that the media has treated him respectfully up to now. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:32, 31 March 2019 (EDT)
+
Kimberly Strassel pointed out, however, that Trump's actual requests to the Ukrainian president together with whomever had part in delaying aid, is questionable only when seen in the context of "moving the goalposts". Digging up dirt on an opponent is one thing, but Ukrainian entities colluding with members of the U.S. government is a legitimate concern having to do with national security [about which] the U.S. president has a right to know, and the request for which is legitimately susceptible to the application of ''quid pro quo'' leverage.
:It was WaPo that gave him the nickname Creepy Uncle Joe. That would be hard to walk back. And there was a book published about female Secret Service Agents who were afraid to report his abuse because ''they'' would be demoted. In the Flores incident, his behavior is on a par with Al Franken, maybe even more innocuous. But I'm sure there is a steady stream of accusers lined up if he persists. The business I heard about this morning of an Amendment to curtail ''Roe vs. Wade'' is new, and needs to be pursued and slapped in his article. On the face of it, this appears to accrue to Beto, Klobuchar, and possibly Harris's benefit. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:35, 31 March 2019 (EDT)
+
:Once we can put a fork in Biden, remember, the ticket likely will contain two of the remainders. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:36, 31 March 2019 (EDT)
+
:Current polling is a function of name recognition, not popularity or support. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:38, 31 March 2019 (EDT)
+
::Given the Russia/Trump collusion madness of leftists/liberals, the various anti-Trump rallies/disparagements of liberals/leftist and the various loony proposals that Democrats don't even take seriously like the Green New Deal (where the Democrats in the Senate merely voted present), there is a certain logic indicating that the next Democratic presidential candidate will be primarily anti-Trump and not a policy wonk. It is similar to just as there is Jesus Christ, there is an anti-Christ.  Following this logic, the candidate will be a non-white woman who is fairly on the left, but not so far out to the left that the candidate still have a chance of defeating Trump (in the estimation of Democrats). Therefore, the obnoxious Kamala Harris is the frontrunner in terms of being "the one".  
+
  
::I know the above sounds a bit crazy, but Trump derangement syndrome is far more virulent than Bush derangement syndrome.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:51, 1 April 2019 (EDT)
+
This week the liberal press has been trying to blur the lines between the two requests, not to mention never mentioning the similar requests of high-ranking Democrats. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 17:15, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
:::Biden may choose to not to run because he knows that he will face a gauntlet of legitimate sexual harassment allegations. And I wouldn't put it past some rival Democrats of manufacturing some sexual harassment allegations either duplicitously or due to being unreasonable people. Biden has been in politics long enough to know that he will not escape these sexual harassment allegations.
+
:"It was a perfect phone call. Everybody knows it." - Donald Trump.[https://www.wral.com/what-donald-trump-has-already-said-about-ukraine-tells-us-plenty/18652854/]
  
:::And with California moving up its primary date, this further cements that Kamala Harris is the candidate to most likely win the Democrat primary contest for the presidency.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:51, 1 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:"If that perfect phone call with the President of Ukraine Isn’t considered appropriate, then no future President can EVER again speak to another foreign leader!" - Donald Trump.[https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1177604833538392065?lang=en][[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 17:52, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
::::If Kamala Harris runs, she will drone on and on about being "deeply concerned" and "deeply troubled" about Donald Trump's racial views, despite minority unemployment being at record lows under Trump due to his pro-growth economic policies. If Harris wins, she will be a one term president due to her lackluster economic policies among other things (And her economic policies could hurt minorities the most). In addition, since she is a far less likeable person than Obama, she could rev up white identity politics with her racial/gender grievance politics.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:51, 1 April 2019 (EDT)
+
== I feel so sorry for you Democrats (and secular globalists). My condolences. ==
+
  
Democrats, given how much you have embraced me-too politics, I know it must so hard to have your front runner be creepy Joe Biden. I feel so sorry you. My deepest condolences.  
+
::Perfect. I hope this clarifies things.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 17:55, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::The purpose of the impeachment inquiry, begun with a anonymous source who now Schiff ''will not'' call to testify, is to discredit the Barr/Durham investigation. This is the same pattern the same deep staters and the same media [[sockpuppets]] used with the ''Steele dossier''. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:22, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Yes, it's all of a piece. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 22:20, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
  
By the way, 2020 is going to be a Trumpslide if the economy stays good.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:14, 1 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Warren's 3½ month climb comes to an end==
:The nomination is in Joe Biden's hands....Oh wait, is that really the best way put it? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:14, 1 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::Biden's troubles might suggest that this is Sanders' time to shine. Sanders already leads in terms of crowd sizes and fundraising. Yet the media is focused on Beto and Warren, who I would consider to be long shots. It's a weird news blackout that allows even South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg to get more media attention than Bernie. Do reporters just assume that the system is rigged and that Bernie will of course get shafted again?[https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/04/02/dems-ignoring-the-candidate-whos-cleaning-up/] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:09, 3 April 2019 (EDT) 
+
  
=== P.S. A Christian conservative age is rising ===
+
Some people have said that [[Elizabeth Warren]]'s campaign has been perfect. Okay, in reality, nobody did. But it looks like this week she will fall from grace with a 3% decrease!
  
[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCsiAKRKcgzA_372WbXNBaw Christianity, Nationalism, Populism, and Traditionalism are the wave of the future]. Let's go surfing now, everybody's learning how, come on a Christian, conservative, surfing safari with me! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:14, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
Never trust the Democrats—they always lose one way or another and leave you holding the bag. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 21:54, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Dick Morris says if Hillary has a pulse, she's running for president. A month ago news reports were Hillary was the mastermind behind then Warren's rise; then Hillary was advising ''both'' Biden and Warren, which explains Biden's downfall. Warren is too stupid to severe all ties with Clinton, which will be her downfall. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:46, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:The parallels between [http://www.dickmorris.com/will-hillary-follow-humphreys-trajectory-history-video/ Humphrey and McGovern, Hillary and Warren, 1972 and 2020] are too powerful to ignore. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:50, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:I guess some feel we're due for another Beach Boys revival. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 23:21, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
====Warren's odds plummet 10½%====
::Brexit and the 2016 US presidential election: "And coming off the line when the light turns green, well she blows them out of the water like you never seen. I get pushed out of shape and it's hard to steer, when I get rubber in all four gears. She's my little deuce coupe. You don't know what I got." :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:53, 3 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Here's something sad; surf-rocker Dick Dale died on March 16.  I bought a copy of "Miserlou" a few years back but didn't know much about his career. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 00:16, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Rod Rosenstein blows it ==
+
Don't say RobS didn't warn you, folks.  He didn't even mention Kamala Harris, but she's similar to Hillary too, and the DNC and the donors had been grooming her for the Presidential role.  Notwithstanding, she was a precursor to Warren's precipitous plummet, a front-runner having dropped to 2%. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 23:14, 4 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Yep. As Harris herself says, those racist and sexist Democrats aren't ready for black woman president.
  
If you remember, [[Rod Rosenstein]] rose to the position of Deputy Attorney General and was effectively the Attorney General for matters having to do with [[Robert S. Mueller]]'s investigation because someone had illegal access to FISA surveillance reports and bluffed Attorney General [[Jeff Sessions]] into clumsily dodging a question about Trump, thinking the reports could only have come from lawfully subpoenaed documents as part of a criminal investigation.
+
:Things are setting up pretty good for a wildcard, a dark horse, maybe even a third party candidate. Otherwise we're looking a Pete Buttigieg. Buttigieg is hard to get excited about.  OTOH, Biden hasn't suffered much, he's holding steady with his black base. It's hard to imagine blacks jumping from Biden to Buttigieg, Warren, or Sanders. Polls show Trump has a 42% approval among black males. If that holds, it won't matter who the Democrats nominate. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:34, 4 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It's bizarre to see Biden leading the pack again.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html] This is a man with no discernible principles or talent beyond raking in all that dirty money from Ukraine, China, Romania, etc. etc. [https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Jimmy+Dore+biden+president&view=detail&mid=07D9BE56CD19CA8DDFDB07D9BE56CD19CA8DDFDB&FORM=VIRE This video] of Biden forgetting Obama's name has to be seen to be believed: "He's saying that it was President [long pause with blank expression] my boss." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:58, 5 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Blacks are sticking with a moderate they know. It demonstrates that blacks are not particularly excited or happy about the radical left turn the rest of the party has taken. Remember blacks are pro-God, pro-family, pro-entrepreneurial capitalism, pro-gun rights for self defense (after their experience with the KKK and Democrats), anti-crime, anti-bad schools, anti-illegal immigration, and anti-stupidity.
 +
:::Blacks who don't support Biden support Trump. [https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/11/04/number-democrats-showing-trump-rallies-stunning/] We're seeing the long awaited break up of the Democratic behemoth.  Blacks know instinctively if they don't stop voting Democrat, it will be another 150 years before a black man is ever elected President after the experience of Obama. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:09, 5 November 2019 (EST)
  
So Sessions was forced to recuse himself from the investigation supposedly of whether Russian collusion had occurred (collusion which would never have been a violation of the law regardless) but was really a fishing expedition using the same strategy they used against Jeff Sessions and Lt. Gen. [[Michael T. Flynn|Mike Flynn]] as well.
+
==Popular government==
  
Rosenstein took over, and Trump never said a bad word against him.  Trump asked Rosenstein to ask Congress's relevant committees to ask the FISA court for highly classified reports on the activities of the members of the Deep State that he had dismissed.  Rosenstein and the committees balked and Rob S. thinks that this was the high water mark for the [[Deep State]].
+
The United States may not be a democracy, but [[James Madison]] called it a popular government. He also said:
  
But Rosenstein was too personally involved in Trump's rapport with the Deep State, from both sides, to ever escape unscathed. Rosenstein tried to leap back to the Deep State according to U.S. Attorney [[Joseph diGenova|Joe diGenova]] who had worked in Washington DC for a long time:
+
:[I]n a democracy the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representives and agents...
  
:So let's look at what Mueller concludes: no evidence of collusion. If that's the case, what evidence did Rod Rosenstein have when he appointed Bob Mueller? The answer: the firing of [[James Comey]].  Who recommended the firing of James Comey?  Rod Rosenstein.
+
:[M]ost of the popular governments of antiquity were of the democratic species; and even in modern Europe, to which we owe the great principle of representation, no example is seen of a government wholly popular, and founded, at the same time, wholly on that principle. If Europe has the merit of discovering this great mechanical power in government, by the simple agency of which the will of the largest political body may be concentrated, and its force directed to any object which the public good requires, America can claim the merit of making the discovery the basis of unmixed and extensive republics. (''Federalist Papers'', no. 14, 1787)
  
:Listen, when the history of this is written, there will be one person who will come away from history with the most sullied reputation of anyone: Rod Rosenstein, a duplicitous, conniving, sniveling, subversive SOB.
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 02:01, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:The word that has crept into the American political vocabulary ''via'' Hillary Clinton no less is [[stakeholder]]. It's still common now in State Department press releases, usually about negotiations with foreign "stakeholders" while ignoring popular sentiment in various countries. Mexico, Egypt, and Turkey are all considered "democratic" in American parlance, while really being governed by "stakeholders", similar to the British House of Lords prior to the 1990s reforms. Brexit and Trumpism are struggles between populism and established "stakeholders", i.e. multinational corporate globalists. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:02, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
===Update: Mueller Report says Rosenstein didn't try to persuade Trump to fire Comey===
+
==Response to unimportant remarks==
  
::While it's true that Rosenstein briefly considered helping to get members of Trump's cabinet to convene to consider Trump's removal (and Trump must have become aware of this when it was reported), the Mueller Report contradicts what [[Joseph DiGenova|Joe DiGenova]] said about him above.  
+
Some self-proclaimed watchdogs of truth here are in reality Big Babies for their liberal cause.  What is this uproar among the nations?  Why are the pagans devising a vain thing? The {{sc|Lord}} and His anointed scoff at them.  Then he speaks to them with anger: "I have established thee a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek."
  
::The report stated that Trump had decided to fire Comey because Comey had told Trump that he wouldn't say publicly that he was not investigating Trump, even though Comey had told Trump privately that he wasn't on three different occasionsThis was ''before'' it was revealed that the FBI was monitoring Trump on the pretext of monitoring someone else in Trump's purview within the Executive Branch, the authorization of which was based on faked FISA court data.
+
Strangely, SamHB wasn't convinced by my clear statement that there is a movement, especially among non-denominational church-goers, of not calling their relationship with Jesus Christ a religionHe also seems completely unaware that it has been that way for over thirty years.
  
::The report goes on to say that Trump went to Rosenstein and others to ask their advice in carrying out what he had decided to do (firing Comey), not to say that he was undecided.  Rosenstein had said he thought it would be best if when the dismissal was announced, the White House should make a point of mentioning Comey's imposing himself in making decisions about reopening Hillary's case (and determining her guilt or innocence) with regard to her mishandling State Department emails—and his timing in doing it at the last stage of the election.
+
Nor did he notice the different strains of arguments along those same lines, clearly committed to memory after passages of time, that only could have been independently developed, among Christian Conservapedians, nor did he stop to think that the basis for rejecting the reports of the Gallup poll results presupposed that custom, rather than it being suggested as a matter for dispute, nor did he look to see it was actually shown to be the case after JohnZ repeated the poll question.
  
::So, apparently even RobS's good friend diGenova isn't perfect, and diGenova may have to retract one or two of his adjectives. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:10, 12 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Nor did he search the internet to look for other examples to see if he could confirm or deny the doubt he expressed, nor was he paying attention when I repeated one of the same arguments to User:Conservative three years ago when he queried his fellow editors about a poll from Baylor University, and of course Sam's lazy skeptic behavior is just the personality type people like the most.
  
== Rod Rosenstein (cont'd) ==
+
I only dealt with one crybaby in this section, so why did I omit others?  Maybe I'll get to them later.  It's not as if disputing these slack-handed objections are pressing or significant. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 23:35, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Rosenstein is allegedly helping Trump's new Attorney General [[William Barr|Bill Barr]] to write a report ''from'' Trump for a change of pace from all the other reports ''about'' Trump.  But what would prevent Rosenstein from leaking the contents of the report ahead of time and win the protection of Democrats to keep himself employed?  Probably the fact that everyone would know that he had done it. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 07:28, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Golden Fleece Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2016 dinner guests==
:Rosenstein original plan was to replace Comey with Mueller as FBI director. Rosenstein's wife is a Clinton lawyer and Hillary never forgave Comey for "shiving" her. Mueller as FBI director would have allowed Rosenstien to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. Mueller interviewed for the job, but Trump rejected the idea of hiring him. So Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel.<br/>What did McCabe have on Sessions that forced him to recuse? Previous recusals were limited to some specific matter presently before the courts. The very broad recusal Sessions issued was quite irregular. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:34, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::There are two theories being floated now about Rosenstein. While there is almost universal agreement Rosenstein's primary concern was protecting the integrity of the institution from exposure to the damage the Obama DOJ operatives did it, one theory states Rosenstein appointed Mueller in order to take the investigation away from the corrupt and  partisan Acting FBI director, [[Andrew McCabe]]. The other theory states Rosenstein was part of the coup, evidenced by the timing of his indictment of 12 Russian ham sandwiches, who will never stand trial, in order to embarrass Trump during the June 2018 Helsinki Summit with Putin. Whatever the final narrative, we can only discover it through court proceedings in the dispute between McCabe and Rosenstein over "wearing a wire," or by a new Special Counsel.
+
::As to Democrats' demand for the full report, that would entail Trump declassifying the original [[Five Eyes]] communication [[John Brennan]] claimed to have, which supposedly sparked the [[probable cause]] for [[Peter Strzok]] to begin a counterintelligence investigation. That will expose the entire investigation as being illegal from the git-go. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:26, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::As to William Barr, before anyone gets excited about getting to the truth of the matter, one should read [[Iran-Contra_affair#William_Barr_rebukes_Bill_Clinton|this section]] of the Iran/Contra article in it's entire context (meaning some of the earlier subsections as well). I stand by the sourcing, and this was written prior to the 2016 election. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:53, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Barr was part of Bush Sr's inner circle going back to his days at the CIA. Bush Sr. supposedly voted for Hillary in 2016.[https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/book-details-barbara-bushs-dislike-trump-estrangement-gop/story?id=61960776] Yet Barr just handed Trump a big win. The Bush dynasty's relationship to the Clintons and the Trumps is apparently a complex one. The media tries to make it sound like the Bushes just couldn't stand Trump's crudeness. But W.'s friendship with Bill predates Trump's election. He kept Clinton favorite George Tenet as head of the CIA. This decision is hard to explain in terms of Tenet's competence.<br/>After Michael Cohen's office was raided, Trump had a lot of trouble finding an attorney willing to represent him. As long as McCain was alive, Lindsay Graham refused to consider a new attorney general. So Trump was stuck with Sessions. It seems to me that this dilemma could have been resolved by recusing Rosenstein. Rosenstein was obviously conflicted, as least with respect to the issue of investigating Comey's firing. If you have ever seen Rosenstein testify, he is quite a mousy guy. I don't see him saying "no" if the boss insists. I suspect the constitutional crisis of the last two years is all about Rosenstein not being able to stand up to his wife. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:36, 3 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::It's the Deep State and [[Uniparty]] covering up for their own. I don't think Barr will appoint another Special Counsel to investigate Hillary, the DNC, Clinton Foundation, Obama etc cause the Clinton's got enough poop on Barr in the [[Mena/Contra]] scandal and Barr's involvement with Southern Air Transport. The best we can hope for is Barr willing to take up criminal referrals of Brennan, [[Susan Rice]], [[Sally Yates]], etc. Something has to be done Legislation is needed, too, to insure that the Patriot Act and FISA are not used against political opponents again. This will require bipartisanship. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:19, 3 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Venezuela and Interventionism ==
+
[[John Brennan]]<br>
 +
[[Susan Rice]]<br>
 +
[[Eric Ciaramella]] knew John Brennan, Susan Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, was 1st whistle-blower<br>
 +
[[Joe Biden]]<br>
 +
[[Nancy Pelosi]]<br>
 +
[[John Kerry]]<br>
 +
[[Loretta Lynch]]<br>
 +
[[John Podesta]]<br>
 +
[[Tony Podesta]]<br>
 +
[[Valerie Jarrett]]<br>
 +
[[Samantha Power]]<br>
 +
[[Leonardo DiCaprio]]<br>
 +
[[James Clapper]]<br>
 +
[[James Comey]]<br>
 +
[[Matteo Renzi]] helped Brennan, Comey spy on Trump, possible target of Bill Barr and John Durham<br>
 +
[[Charles Kupchan]], [[Eric Ciaramella]]'s boss. Worked at [[NSC]]
  
We need to have a serious discussion about Venezuela.  
+
The White House<br>
 +
Washington D.C.<br>
 +
1:00 pm<br>
 +
Formal attire<br>
 +
RSVP<br>
  
Right now, the situation is getting increasingly dangerous. Both Russia ''and'' China have deployed troops to the country, which means that any military intervention by the US runs the risk of sparking a Third World War. [https://observer.com/2019/03/donald-trump-russian-troops-venezuela-all-options-available/][https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/chinese-army-arrives-in-venezuela-just-days-after-the-russian-miltary/]
+
Menu<br>
 +
[it writes itself] Roast Trump
  
Now, keep in mind that President Trump actually has a strong case for military intervention, considering that what Russia and China are doing blatantly violates the Monroe Doctrine. But on the other hand, the US itself has been violating the Monroe Doctrine non-stop since 1945 with its strong military presence in the Eastern Hemisphere. No wonder Trump is getting very little sympathy from the "strict non-interventionist" crowd on the right.[https://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trumps-silly-and-dangerous-venezuela-ultimatum/]
 
  
Knowing Putin, I don't believe he'll back down on Venezuela unless President Trump makes ''major'' concessions in the Eastern Hemisphere, particularly Syria. After all, he seems determined to enforce his own version of the Monroe Doctrine (actually, I would call it a "Putin Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine).[https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/after-trumps-call-get-out-venezuela-russia-asks-when-are-you-leaving]
+
[[Diane Feinstein]] liked China together with [[Joe Biden]]<br>
 +
[[Sean Misko]] Second whistle-blower, recruited by [[Adam Schiff]], August 2019<br>
 +
[[Abigail Grace]] Schiff employee, recruited February 2019<br>
  
In light of this situation, what course of action should be done? Military intervention shouldn't be on the table, but "Peace Through Strength" and "Give x number of concessions" absolutely should be. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 15:52, 3 April 2019 (EDT)
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:56, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Technically, the Monroe Doctrine only said no more colonization of the Americas by Europeans. It never said anything about whether we'd intervene in other countries, so I'm not sure those conflicts since 1945 are truly violations of the Monroe Doctrine.
+
==[[O’Sullivan’s First Law]]==
  
:Besides, look what happened in the 1930s when we adhered to strict non-interventionalism. That just was a disaster for us and for our allies with the Great Depression and all of that. We even bankrupted other nations by trying to take back loans only for us to be bankrupt as well. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 16:17, 3 April 2019 (EDT)
+
[[File:Pew polls Democrat divergence 1994-2017.jpg|right|275px]]
 +
It's not your imagination.
  
::I think the Trump Administration is applying the Roosevelt Corollary, a later modification of the Monroe Doctrine. I'm not sure the taking back of loans during the Great Depression is a good example of non-interventionism -- one could say it was an act of interventionism to get involved in the business of giving out overseas loans (after WWI, I think) in the first place. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:10, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Wow, those graphs really illustrate the point.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:11, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
:::[[Vox Day]] wrote: "As I observed last year, Syria was a major turning point and will likely mark the end of the global US empire. The fall of Libya and the near-expansion of NATO to Ukraine and Georgia forced the Russians and the Chinese to realize that the time for resistance had finally arrived, and their strategists recognized that the US military is too weak and overextended to be capable of enforcing the Monroe Doctrine. Since the US is almost certain to back down on Venezuela, where its chosen puppet has absolutely no popular support, it is safe to expect US retreats on other fronts as China and Russia start putting on the pressure elsewhere in South and Central America. Remember, China already controls the Panama Canal and has considerable influence on the west coast of Canada."[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-anti-imperial-alliance.html]
+
  
:::The USA is overextended and has a massive national debt. "Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined."[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/us-military-bases-around-the-world-119321]
+
==Y'all==
 +
...should probably read [https://www.lawfareblog.com/amb-william-taylor-testifies-impeachment-inquiry Bill Taylor's opening statement]. Your boy just got deep-sixed. Best to start the grieving process now so you're all ready to rally round the flag for Pence 2020. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:15, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>''Yawn''* A State Department official (one of the most liberal of the various government agencies, which says a lot) said something bad about Trump. This is old news and has been for the past three years. It's happened countless times. I recommend you read/watch this: [https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/10/22/fncs-ingraham-who-are-these-deep-state-state-department-types-heading-into-the-hill-to-testify/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:27, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::That's the spirit. Denial's the first stage. Get it all out. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:34, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Exactly -- this is probably the 20th time you've posted something on this talk page essentially saying: "look at this--Trump's going down big time and you're all going to weep." Well, we're still waiting. He won't be removed from office, he won't resign, and there's a good chance he'll win re-election next year. The media's been making predictions of Trump resigning since 2017. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:50, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Did the media ever object to any investigation of Trump? The Obama FBI thoroughly investigated him when he was a candidate -- and came up with nothing. At least that's what the NYT reported at the time. Hunter Biden got $83,000 a month from Burisma and never even went to Ukraine. It was probably all because of his unique skill set and had nothing at all to do with the fact that his dad was Obama's "point man" on Ukraine. All the same, I don't see any harm in asking the Ukrainian government to check it out. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:15, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Bill Taylor is a Russian asset. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:10, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
Trump is not only resilient, he is anti-fragile. What do I mean by that? I mean not only are these illegitimate attacks and threats of impeachment not harming Trump, but they are making him stronger. When the Democrates shout impeachment, Trump's reelection team sounds out campaign donation requests and the money is flooding in. Please see: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_qvvyUhMxg Trump's record-breaking cash haul reportedly rattling Dems].[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:22, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::The size of the national debt and the size of the US military budget point to the USA being overextended.  
+
:''Antifragile?!'' Trump is going to pieces so fast, most of his people have abandoned their posts to avoid the smouldering orange shrapnel. There's no way we would've seen the Syria or Doral disasters if he still had a functioning WH/legal team (or competent Congressional allies) determined to see him through to 2020.  
  
:::"My [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mG5rPFUAAAAJ&hl=fr research] in Venezuela suggests otherwise. All credible polling in Venezuela [http://www.producto.com.ve/pro/palestra/datan-lisis-679-rechaza-gesti-n-maduro-y-quiere-que-deje-poder-o says] that most Venezuelans desperately want Maduro out. But that does not necessarily mean they are open to desperate measures. In November 2018, I worked with Datanálisis, one of Venezuela’s most respected polling companies, to add several questions about military intervention and potential negotiations to its nationwide tracking poll. When asked whether they would support “a foreign military intervention to remove President Maduro from his position,” only 35 percent said yes – hardly the warm welcome predicted by advocates. More than half – 54 percent – would reject such an operation. What Venezuelans want: Most Venezuelans blame their authoritarian president, Nicolás Maduro, for the country's humanitarian crisis and would like to see him removed from office. But a clear majority would reject a foreign military operation to oust him. The most popular way to restore democracy in Venezuela would be a negotiated settlement to depose Maduro."[https://www.wola.org/analysis/venezuelans-want-president-maduro-oppose-foreign-military-intervention-remove/]
+
:This is the ugly twisting in the wind stage while McConnell tries to figure out how to pull the trigger and still save the Senate. Expect Bolton and Romney to play prominent roles, with Pence as the clean-hands conservative for the base to rally round afterwards. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:00, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I think we should dig up all your past predictions of Trump's imminent doom. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:06, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::You mean the Syrian cease-fire????  (This is my impression of SamHB's unnecessary punctuation manoeuvre, where he tries to stun readers into abandoning rational thought. Only this time, the question is based on something relevant. And yes, I know I'm replying to JohnZ—SamHB does it too.) [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:16, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Knock yourself out, man. It's almost certainly of greater historical utility than chronicling Trump's "achievements". [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:39, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Yet, you won't comment on the cease-fire. <s>Coward</s>. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:41, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::The withdrawal / "cease-fire" looks like a rotten deal for the Kurds. It's also hard to see how it advances US interests in the region. See if the Israelis are happy about it. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
[[File:C9Pak4-W0AIldKy (1).jpg|right|350px|thumb|Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton, Feb. 12, 2012, "Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria." ''The Guardian'' reported on July 30, 2012, “[Al-Qaida’s] goal is establishing an Islamic state and not a Syrian state.” [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/30/al-qaida-rebels-battle-syria] ]]
 +
:::::::Yah. Real leadership. First you arm al Qaeda. When al Qaeda morphs into ISIS and starts beheading people, then you arm the Kurds to fight the monster you created. The Kurds take the arms you give them and commit terrorist attacks against a NATO ally.
 +
:::::::Why don't you go die for Obamunism and Clintonism if its such a glorious cause.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:15, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Man, I love it when you try and do history. You'll never have the stones to admit it, but you were cheering bin Laden, the mujahideen and the CIA every inch of the way when they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.
  
:::I have no idea how much popular support Maduro's main opposition has (referred to above by Vox Day as Washington's puppet).  
+
::::::::And as far as the current situation in Syria goes, there's a whole bunch of GOP senators who've just witnessed Trump get pantsed by Erdogan and Putin. Bear that in mind when you're running the odds on his Senate trial. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:40, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::One thing I do know. Before America gets involved with overthrowing corrupt governments, Hillary Clinton and Comey needs to be behind bars.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:34, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::No, we did not cheer on or, heck, have any involvement in bin Laden or al Qaeda's actions in Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan war. He got his own form of training and supplies. The 9/11 Commission Report made that VERY clear. Now, the mujahideen was in fact backed by us, but on the other hand, the mujahideen also attempted to aid us in taking out Osama bin Laden during the Clinton years (just watch Path to 9/11, or more specifically the deleted footage). As far as GOP senators, give names (besides Mitch McConnell, I mean). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::My personal objection to the idea of removing military bases is that it would lead directly to the kind of situation of the Great Depression, where we went total isolationist in an attempt to save what little funds we had left from the Stock Market Crash, and even took back several loans and left several allies to flounder, which ultimately resulted in Nazi Germany getting power, not to mention the Communists making inroads. Heck, cutting military funding was even what led to 9/11 and various other terror attacks such as the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, cuts made by Clinton in favor of welfare programs. I agree we should reduce the bloated government budget, and I also agree that Hillary Clinton and Comey need to be behind bars (heck, the Obamas as well, since they've done enough crimes that Clinton comes across as clean by comparison, and that isn't easy to say since she's quite the crook), but gutting the military is NOT the answer. And let me ask you this: Is it even worth gutting the military, calling for a retreat, not even sending arms to people, if it results in our neighbors and allies going communist, like in Vietnam when we did EXACTLY what you are proposing by gutting the military? And BTW, democracy is PRECISELY the reason Venezuela is in this mess in the first place, in fact, democracy should NEVER be sought after. Want to know what the true face of democracy is? Guillotines, gulags, and mob violence. That's what its true face is, ever since the French Revolution revived democracy since the days of Athens. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:36, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Eh? Who's this "we" you're talking about? You weren't even born when the Soviets withdrew. And if you think bin Laden wasn't elbow deep in the wider mujahideen effort - and coordinating extensively with other US-backed proxies - then you've got yourself some serious lernin' to do.  
Many governments need to pay the USA to have its troops so costs are covered. Trump is beginning to do that, but my guess is only part of the costs are being covered. Bottom line, the USA has to tackle its debt. After WWII, the USA started paying back its debt. Realistically, government programs need to be cut now and then once the elderly baby boomers go through the system, then the debt has to be cut back. In addition, the baby boomers should work as long as they can before they collect social security. The current system will probably see another Great Depression within 15 years. That would be extremely bad not only the USA, but for the world as a whole as well since the USA is such a big portion of the global economic system. Furthermore, one of the causes of WWII was poor economic conditions in Germany. Bad economic conditions can lead to war and violent/destruction revolutions. The French historian Fernand Braudel rightly pointed out that revolutions rarely achieve their aims and are usually destructive in nature.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:20, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Bernie Sanders will become the frontrunner for the Democratic Party ==
+
::::::::::As for GOP senators, there's currently a grand total of [https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/22/republican-senator-ruled-out-impeachment-trump/ ''seven''] who've come out explicitly against impeachment. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:12, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::[https://www.scribd.com/doc/431916070 46 Republican Senators] are on the record condemning the unconstitutional Pelosi/Schiff impeachment process: 1.Graham 2.McConnell 3.Grassley 4.Thune 5.Blunt 6.Shelby 7.Inhofe 8.Roberts 9.Crapo 10.Cornyn 11.Burr 12.Barrasso 13.Wicker 14.Risch 15.Boozman 16.Moran 17.Toomey 18.Rubio 19.Paul 20.Hoeven 21.Lee 22.Johnson 23.Scott (SC) 24.Fischer 25.Cruz 26.Capito 27.Cassidy 28.Lankford 29.Cotton 30.Daines 31.Perdue 32.Ernst 33.Tillis 34.Rounds 35.Sasse 36.Young 37.Kennedy 38.Hyde-Smith 39.Blackburn 40.Cramer 41.McSally 42.Braun 43.Hawley 44.Scott (FL) 45.Portman and 46.Sullivan. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:30, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I thought about the 2020 election more. Bernie Sanders will become the current frontrunner of the Democratic Party.  
+
<--- Well, it's much more measured in tone than the Cipollone letter, but it's just as constitutionally illiterate. Trump will get all the rich creamy justice and due process he can handle in his Senate trial. In the meantime, the House gets to set the rules and there's no requirement to hold a vote on starting an impeachment inquiry. Graham and McConnell know this, of course, but they're hoping the rubes and loons in the base will swallow it as a sincere and suitably ''forceful'' act of protest.
  
I think there will be a continual drip, drip, drip of women's accusations that Joe Biden will face and I don't think he will be able to turn things around. The MSM will be a mixed bag of defending Biden and slamming him.
+
Don Jr. and allies have already condemned it as weak sauce process / precedent bluster (which it obviously is), and apparently want Graham to start holding parallel hearings in the Senate. Lindsey's none too enthusiastic about that, though... [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:56, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:This is a tempest in a teapot. Barr/Durham will start raining down the artillery of prosecution on some of the Democrats. The Senate will vote not to impeach Trump. And the exceedingly weak Democratic candidate to Trump in the presidential election will be steamrolled by the 2020 Trumpslide. It will be a brutal campaign, but Trump will once again be the triumphant winner. Because that is what winners do. They win![[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 23:22, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I think our friend JohnZ doesn't understand the American justice system. Even a homeless bum on the street who's arrested for panhandling understands that he is entitled to [[due process]], which Democrats have ignored and bulldozed under a mountain of garbage. If they want to proceed with this railroad job of burning the Constitution in plain sight of all, it will cost them dearly for generations to come - generations that survive their abortion holocaust and generations of immigrants. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 03:54, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
BERNIE SANDERS IS BEATING KAMALA HARRIS 2-1 AMONG BLACK DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS, NEW POLL FINDS.[https://theintercept.com/2019/03/06/bernie-sanders-black-voters-2020/]
+
:::Wut? Trump is currently in a far better position than any ordinary poor schmo under criminal investigation. There are '''47''' GOP members of the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight Committees entitled to sit in on the depositions and ask questions, so he's got ''friendly representation'' in what is essentially a grand jury process.
  
Sanders Tops Democratic Fundraising As O'Rourke, Harris And Buttigieg Draw Big Sums.[https://www.npr.org/2019/04/02/709083225/sanders-tops-democratic-fundraising-so-far-as-harris-and-buttigieg-draw-big-sums]
+
:::And when that 47 includes partisan cranks-on-wheels like Devin Nunes, Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan, no sane person believes that a) witnesses aren't being subjected to hostile questioning, or that b) Trump isn't getting a blow-by-blow account of proceedings. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:49, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::It's not even worth debating if you are going to pretend to be that ignorant of justice, due process, and the Constitution. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:58, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::You keeping banging on about the Constitution. It's so silent on the matter, Pelosi could write "abuse of power" on the back of a napkin and put it forward as an article of impeachment for the House to vote on. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:31, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::You are correct. The House could even vote on and pass it. And it's ''still'' a violation of an American citizens due process rights. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:33, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I think the most likely scenario is Trump vs. Sanders in 2020.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:05, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Nope. In our hypothetical, a fair trial in the Senate would give Trump his full complement of due process rights. He'd also have his Fifth Amendment grand jury protection prior to this, as Nancy's napkin would have to convince a majority of the House to vote to impeach.  
:Political odds websites now pick Sanders as the frontrunner.[https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZqdI6AwYnN0b/][https://electionbettingodds.com/][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:55, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::If you think of McGovern in 1972, Dukakis in 1984, and Kerry in 2004, nominating Sanders would fit a historic pattern: Oppose a Republican running for re-election with a leftist whose appeal is limited to white liberals. Of the major Dems in the race, recent polls suggest that Sanders gives Trump the least to worry about.[https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2019/04/03/dana-milbank-bernie/]<br/>The McGovern/Sanders parallel seems especially close. Even Hillary motivated blacks to vote more than Sanders does. Although he has had a long life with little in the way of outstanding accomplishments, Bernie's supporters don't see him as the best of a mediocre lot. He gets huge crowds and enthusiastic rallies. He's one of them and they are applauding themselves. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 09:39, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Klobachar and Harris cannot be counted out. Klobuchar is hard to find concrete dirt on, and Harris has the fundraising power. Klobuchar would be harder to beat if she plays her cards right. Once a death blow is dealt to Sanders, and it likely will, Harris will become the beneficiary. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:10, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Bernie's supporters got a little off-message when they found out that he was being out-polled by Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren—it was shown in a social media outreach worker's attempt at a new slogan: "women are objects—i don't respect them #Bernie2020".  I don't know how they got so carried away as to attach themselves to such a wrong idea, but almost needless to say, after listening to the reaction of the very first female Twitter user that discovered it through its hashtag and immediately demanded a full retraction, they decided the slogan was...too disadvantageous relative to the benefits that might be expected from its propagation and was just as immediately scrapped. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 01:12, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Biden optics ==
+
:::::::If you want to argue otherwise, you'll need to show how being impeached by the House deprives Trump of life, liberty, or property. Best of luck with that. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 12:07, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Let's give credit where credit is due. JohnZ is a visionary, cause Nancy writing "abuse of power" on the back of a napkins appears to be exactly what happened. Article II, [https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/12/14/dershowitz-scotus-just-crippled-second-house-impeachment-charge-trump/ "obstruction of the obtuse", was moot minutes after the idiots passed it]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:49, 15 December 2019 (EST)
  
Clearer heads would note this doesn't help Trump with female voters, given he has far more women accusing him of significantly worse behaviour. But it's your MPR, so go nuts. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:22, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Wrong.  Your hypothetical, an impeachment based on bad faith as ''you'' chose to put it, written ''"on a napkin"'' deprives the ''American people'' the due process rights of an election!  Trump is our agent!  And we will not stand for you to deny them, even in the form of insulting hypotheticals! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 21:42, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:During the primaries, the ''New York Times'' assigned two reporters to investigate Trump's sexual indiscretions. They came up with nothing.[http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-05-18.html]<br/>If you are talking about the group of women who accused Trump of various things just before the 2016 election, they were of course paid off by Hillary donors. We never heard from them again after the election. The famous "And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything" quote is not actually a confession to anything. When Trump said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes, that wasn't a confession to murder.<br/>What are we left with? That Trump is guilty of using the "P" word? Don't forget that Bill Clinton was worse as a sexual predator than Trump and Biden combined. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:20, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::[https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12?r=US&IR=T 23 and counting]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:26, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::See "[https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/365068-exclusive-prominent-lawyer-sought-donor-cash-for-two-trump-accusers Exclusive: Prominent lawyer sought donor cash for two Trump accusers]" and "[https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-15/scheme-pay-trump-accusers-emerges-one-woman-was-offered-750000 Scheme To Pay Off Trump Accusers Emerges, One Woman Was Offered $750,000]." That took me a whole five seconds to find. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:33, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Aye. Shame you didn't read them first, though. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:25, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::There was no one accusing Trump of sexual harassment before Lisa Bloom started handing out money. Afterwards, there was a dozen. Here is a text message Bloom sent to one accuser: “My best estimate of what I could get for you would be $10-15,000 (less our 1/3 attorney fee)." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:54, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Most sane people point to the Access Hollywood tape as the catalyst for the sudden slew of allegations. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:17, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::What, do you think things just happened like that? The leaked DNC emails shows media personalities tripping over themselves to please the Hillary campaign. The ''Access Hollywood'' tape and the payments to accusers were both part of an "October surprise" strategy. This sleazy strategy has a history of its own that goes back to Johnson's fake Vietnam peace breakthrough in 1968. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:04, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
John Z, Donald Trump hasn't been accused of inappropriately touching children. In the estimation of many people, there are videos/pictures of Joe Biden inappropriately touching children.
+
:::::::Great stuff. Go shake your fist at the Constitution, not me. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:15, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Are you familiar with poker? Some hands are stronger than others. Given the videos/pictures, the fact that we live in an internet and social media age and that Biden inappropriately touched women and children in the estimation of many, Biden's opponents have a straight flush and they are working on a royal flush. In an internet and social media age, Al Franken was politically doomed once that picture of him with his hands over a sleeping woman's breast was made public.
+
::::::Your hypothetical contradicts itself, not the constitution! A denial of the rights of the American people through a bad faith impeachment could not [allow Trump to be provided] with procedural due process [by extension] to his grand jury [despite] the fifth amendment rights you assume <s>they</s> would protect [them], because [the results of the denial] would be fruit from a poisonous tree! If I were you, I'd choose my next words very carefully, as you've already chosen words beneath what the dignity of the American people should be obliged to bear! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 23:13, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
And the drip, drip, drip of more accusations of inappropriate touching is likely to occur for Biden.
+
:::::::Go home, Vargas. [https://youtube.com/watch?v=0k9SjMpAxRM You're drunk]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:53, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
JohnZ, once your protestation appeared, it was clear Conservapedia was right over the target. Planes that are over the target receive flak. And it is the dog that got hit by the stone that yelps the loudest. You are a secular leftist and you think Biden has the best chance of beating Trump. And there is much antipathy toward Donald Trump from secular leftists. See also: [[Donald Trump and American atheists]] (I realize you are from the UK). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:36, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Well, that is a fairly unintelligible response. Let us hope this non-responsive utterance marks a return to an emphasis on learning and a departure from gratuitously insulting Trump—he undeserving of such, as demonstrated by the record of his achievements and accomplishments so comprehensively curated by [[User:1990'sguy]] in the Conservapedia article [[Donald Trump achievements]] and its sub-articles. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 15:39, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
::Abandon all hope that Biden will survive his almost perfect storm of the Me Too Movement.  Bernie Sanders is now the Democratic primary front runner.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:42, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Memes very much helped Donald Trump win the presidency. And [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx4rLLi93Ko THIS MEME] is the Tsar Bomba of memes released against Joe Biden with the help of Donald Trump.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:08, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I actually think Biden's too old, and that Kamala Harris probably has the best chance of reuniting the Obama voting coalition. But feel free to keep playing psychic. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:25, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== A digression on muliple personality disorders ==
+
===Obama bin Biden's jihadis===
 +
:::::::::::"We" as in America, obviously. And while it is true that I wasn't born when the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, I can tell you that the [https://web.archive.org/web/20060601201108/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf 9/11 commission report] specifically states on page 56 that, and I quote, "But Bin Ladin and his comrades had their own sources of support and training, and they received little or no assistance from the United States." And the [https://web.archive.org/web/20150307182839/http://www.gpo.gov:80/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT-23.pdf footnote] near that even expands upon that by saying, and I quote, "In his memoir,Ayman al Zawahiri contemptuously rejects the claim that the Arab mujahideen were financed (even “one penny”) or trained by the United States. See Zawahiri,“Knights Under the Prophet’s Banner,” Al Sharq al Awsat,Dec.2,2001.CIA officials involved in aiding the Afghan resistance regard Bin Ladin and his “Arab Afghans” as having been militarily insignificant in the war and recall having little to do with him. Gary Schroen interview (Mar.3,2003)."
  
JohnZ, In his "fourth bleat" against Bible critics, [[C.S. Lewis]] warned about the inability of critics to determine the various motivations of why someone wrote a text.[http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/SUPLEM/CSLewis.html#r01]  
+
:::::::::::And I meant "give names" regarding which GOP senators witnessed Trump being "pantsed". And besides, there are 100 senators in the senate, so I'm pretty sure the Republican Party is the majority party, with 53 Republicans in the Senate. Even if 7 went up against impeachment, you still haven't listed the number of how many explicitly voted for impeachment, either. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 16:24, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I should have taken Lewis' advice.  
+
::::::::::JohnZ, It's a moot point you're arguing about bin laden in the 1980s. Yes, bin Laden single-handedly took down the godless Soviet Union. Then, full of himself, he was going to take down the House of Saud and the United States, as well. And finally, create the Islamic State. You're peeing in the wind, again. Arming bin Laden was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BEsXLNE8tA Zbigniew Brzezinski's idea] after his brilliant "human rights" policy brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power. What's your point? Other than to prove what an ignorant idiot you are? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::Wut? My point - though you'll never admit it - is you were 100% cheering on Reagan, the CIA, the mujahideen (and by extension, bin Laden) when they were fighting the filthy commies in Afghanistan. So it's pretty funny watching you now play the committed isolationist and parroting Putin's talking points on US interventionism. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:29, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::First of all, while Reagan and the CIA were backing the mujahideen, they did NOT back bin Laden, or al Qaeda. In fact, Ayman al Zawahiri specifically stated that al Qaeda didn't get any backing from the United States, not even one penny, and specifically stated it in his tract ''Knights Under the Prophet's Banner'', which BTW was also sourced in the 9/11 Commission Report. And another thing, who said we're denying our backing Reagan and the CIA? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::"Arming bin Laden was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BEsXLNE8tA Zbigniew Brzezinski's idea] after his brilliant "human rights" policy brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power." Ah, don't you mean "arming the mujahideen" was Brzezinski's idea? Both Gary Schroen and Ayman al Zawahiri specifically denied that the United States supplied much, if any training and financing to al Qaeda, or for that matter to bin Laden, who headed al Qaeda back then as well. There's plenty to blame Brzezinski for, including the disastrous "human rights" policy that resulted in Iran becoming a terror state and the closest thing to a Caliphate, but I'm not sure al Qaeda/bin Laden is one of the tings to blame him for (and believe me, if he did in fact arm them, I most certainly would make sure he's blamed for it). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:16, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I would point out there have been multiple editors of the [[User: Conservative]] account, and I do find the critics' armchair psychological analysis of User: Conservative account rather humorous.  That there are multiple editors is obvious.  For example, a member of an atheist/agnostic wiki noted the footnoting style difference of the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] compared with other articles created under the User: Conservative account.  It must be so frustrating to try the rebut the factually correct and well cited atheism articles
+
::::::::::::Go do some more reading. If, after that, you can't see the historical significance of establishing an Islamist international brigade, then I really can't help you.
at Conservapedia created using the User: Conservative account the without being able to resort to personal attacks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:11, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
'''(Sam's objections'''
+
::::::::::::Not sure what to make of your last paragraph (previous post). They all witnessed Trump get pantsed. There's no way to spin it as good for US interests / allies in the region, and this will likely have a  bearing on how many of them vote in the Senate trial.
  
JohnZ, In his "fourth bleat" against Bible critics, [[C.S. Lewis]] warned about the inability of critics to determine the various motivations of why someone wrote a text.[http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/SUPLEM/CSLewis.html#r01]  
+
::::::::::::None of them have (or will) vote for impeachment. That's the House's job. Are you talking about who I think would vote to convict? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:32, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::I gave you the 9/11 Commission Report, and more than that, I even gave you sources cited within that document, in particular ''Knights Under the Prophet's Banner'' written by Ayman al-Zawahiri, and even an interview with Gary Schroen dated March 3, 2003 specifically stating that al Qaeda had minimal, if any funding or backing by the US during the Soviet-Afghan war. Not to mention [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asw8fhpz0wA a deleted scene] for ''Path to 9/11'' specifically had Mujahideen attempting to aid CIA agents in taking out Bin Laden (and only didn't do so because Sandy Berger and Bill Clinton evidently got cold feet, with the Mujahideen evidently having nothing to do with their failure, and if anything the Mujahideen were very adamant in wanting to kill Bin Laden, which can be gleaned from what bits of Path to 9/11 they DIDN'T cut due to Clinton interference.). And you shouldn't have mentioned GOP senators earlier regarding the whole Trump getting "pantsed" thing. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::And what is YOUR JOB here on this website, JohnZ?  So far all I've been seeing is a shoveling of your leftist ideology that's at odds with this site and the people in it.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:37, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden was rich. He didn't need CIA money. he was part of a coalition of the CIA and Saudi Arabia. He spent his own money ferrying jihadis from Saudi Arabia and the Middle East to Pakistan and Afghanistan. He spent most of his time in Pakistan as a cheerleader and motivational speaker for jihadis ("[[community organizer]]" in Marxist terms). He was one of the few leaders who survived the war (1988-89), and returned to Saudi Arabia as a hero and hometown kid who did good.  His falling out with the Saudi ruling klan came in 1991, when his offer to use his Afghan veteran jihadis to expel Saddam Hussein from Kuwait was rejected, and King Fahd invited American military personal into the Islamic Holy Land for the express purpose of killing Muslims.
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden's crime was being anti-globalist and anti-politically correct (he didn't like the U.S. military which included women, Jews, and Christians who carried the bible and wore the cross). Contemporary communists try to make something out of his anti-communist alliance with the CIA in the 1980s as something hypocritical. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:00, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::IOWs, bin Laden spent his own money to fly jihadis into Pakistan/Afghanistan and remained on the ground as a coach. Once they were there, the CIA armed them. So yes, there is no material assistance provided to bin Laden.
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden was a supporter of the Saudi monarchy throughout this period.
 +
::::::::::::By 1991, bin Laden and his followers viewed themselves as responsible for the destruction of the Soviet Superpower. Puffed up in their pride, they thought they could take on the U.S., the Saudi ruling klan, and Israel next and establish a Sunni Islamic State, along the lines of the Shia Islamic state established by Brzezinski and the Carter administration in Iran in 1979. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:22, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::It should further be noted, traditional jihadis and Islamists thought bin Laden was nuts, and still do. Since 1948 and the creation of Israel, the saying was that "the road to Jerusalem is through Cairo", meaning a revolution to retake Jerusalem would begin in Cairo (as in 1948, 1967, 1973, etc.). Bin Laden held a minority view that the way to retake Jerusalem, and ultimately Mecca to establish an Islamic State, was through New York and the World Trade Center. Traditional jihadis in Egypt and elsewhere viewed  this dangerous and crazy, which would call down the wrath of the United States on the jihadis all over the globe. They viewed bin Laden's crusade as a personal vendetta between him and the Saudi ruling klan. He remains a controversial figure; while he's appreciated for uniting and inspiring jihadis worldwide, most jihadi strategic thinkers view his strategy as flawed, dangerous, and insane. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:39, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::So, wait, hold up. How could the CIA have been involved in Bin Laden and al Qaeda during the 1980s when Ayman al-Zawahiri made it very explicit that they never received any funding or training in his memoirs? Or for that matter Gary Schroen in that interview specifically saying that the CIA had very minimal, if any actual backing of Osama bin Laden. I find it hard to believe that Bin Laden's #2 man in al Qaeda would specifically deny and even scoff at the idea of the CIA or America backing al Qaeda, or Osama bin Laden for that matter, if they actually did. Being his #2 guy, he'd know about al Qaeda's history and inner workings, not to mention alliances made between the organization and others, directly or otherwise. That's kind of the entire point of being the #2 guy, to be entrusted with this information and man the inner workings of the group. Even if we were to argue the whole thing about Gary Schroen was CIA misinformation, I fail to see why al-Zawahiri would lie about something like that, especially when by that point, he and al Qaeda were very obviously not part of the CIA and if anything open enemies. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 21:59, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::::First off, let's clear up some basic facts: (1) al qaeda was not formed until the 1990s, ''after'' bin Laden's expulsion from Saudi Arabia and ''after'' his expulsion from the Sudan; (2) Ayman Zawahiri was sitting in an Egyptian jail throughout half the 1980s for his involvement in the assassination of Anwar Sadat; (3) Zawahiri and bi Laden did not formally link up until after both their expulsions from Sudan in the 1990s.
 +
::::::::::::::During the [[Soviet-Afghan War]], the CIA and Saudi regime worked together. The Saudis provided manpower from all all over the Mid East, and bin Laden's personal financial contribution was to provide airfare. He didn't provide material assistance to jihadis once they were flown there - that came from the CIA. And bin Laden was not content to sit home in Saudi Arabia and be just a financial backer - he lived in Pakistan and functioned as (one of several) preachers of jihad, giving moral and spiritual guidance to young jihadis (although he was never trained as an Islamic scholar). When the war ended, [https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Yusuf_Azzam Abdullah Yusuf Azzam] was assassinated under mysterious circumstances. Azzam was considered the spiritual leader the jihad, but bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia claiming the title.
 +
::::::::::::::As cited, traditional jihadis of the Sayyid Qtab and Hassan al Banna stripe, always considered jihad against secular leaders as their main objective, such as Sadat, Mubarak, Assad, Saddam, the Shah, or King Hussein of Jordan. This was the big difference between [https://ctc.usma.edu/harmony-program/zawahiris-letter-to-zarqawi-original-language-2/ Ayman al-Zarqawi] (founder of AQI and ISIL) and bin Laden.  Ayman al-Zawahiri took the Egyptian Islamic Jihad in a different direction, which was and remains controversial. The Egyptian Islamic Jihad (or Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood) was always focused overtrhowing first Nassar, then Sadat, then Mubarak, now Sisi. Zawahiri got in bed with bin Laden and brought the wrath of the United States down upon the Egyptian Islamic Jihad for his role in the Embassy bombings. Zawahiri remains on the outs of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad homies for making the jihad global and inviting the U.S. to pursue them. Obama sympathized with them by helping overthrow Mubarak, and widened the split between al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
 +
::::::::::::::IOWs, al Qaeda mostly always was and is a detached branch of Egyptian jihadis in exile at odds with the homies remaining in Egypt. Bin Laden supplied the money. Zawahiri supplied the manpower. I suspect Zawahiri's denials about CIA funding in the 1980s is simply to protect what they consider the first of their great achievements - that a ragtag bunch of jihadis destroyed a Superpower, the Soviet Union. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:07, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I should have taken Lewis' advice.  
+
::::::::::::::A word on the material assistance provided by the U.S.: The only American hardware provided (eventually, after any years), were TOW missiles or [[MANPADS]] to shoot down helicopters, which proved decisive. Prior to that, it was all Soviet equipment (trucks, guns, etc) the U.S. acquired from Egypt as a result of the 1979 Camp David Accords when Egypt became a U.S. client state and kicked the Soviets out. Perhaps because Zawahiri saw no American equipment, only Soviet, he denied any U.S. contribution. And bin Laden certainly did not have the resources to ship the volume of equipment from Egypt to Pakistan.
 +
::::::::::::::The reason for using exclusively Soviet equipment in the war zone is the issue of spare parts; for example, if a truck needs a generator, it can be cannibalized off a captured Soviet truck or one partially destroyed in combat. These are lessons learned from the Germans during WWII, at Kursk and North Africa where spare parts became a big issue. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:33, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I would point out there have been multiple editors of the [[User: Conservative]] account
+
====JohnZ's "Kurdish" communist professional victims====
:Rubbish!!!!  You've been trying to perpetrate this silly fantasy for years, perhaps as part of your "I'm a mysterious person, just like my hero Sun Tzu, and I sometimes write stuff in gibberish alphabets in pursuit of same" fantasy.  No one believes it; for years no one has believed it.  You really ought to stop that, and start behaving like a normal adult.
+
and I do find the critics' armchair psychological analysis of User: Conservative account rather humorous.
+
:Yes, as one of those people, I can assure you that I find my armchair psychological analysis occasionally amusing, albeit sad.  You could be doing good things in the world.
+
That there are multiple editors is obvious.
+
:No it isn't.  Not in the least.
+
For example, a member of an atheist/agnostic wiki noted the footnoting style difference of the [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]] compared with other articles created under the User: Conservative account.
+
:If memory serves, it was you, not the folks at RationalWiki, that have been pushing the "I use inconsistent footnoting styles, therefore I must be multiple people" nonsense.  There is no reason for anyone other than you to push that fantasy.  It's easy to use inconsistent footnoting styles; I (accidentally) do it myself on occasion.  Why don't you stop that pointless fantasy, or else come up with a more convincing "proof" that you are multiple people.  If you really have some friends who like to edit CP, and who share your rather unique style, why don't you have them get their own accounts?
+
It must be so frustrating to try the rebut the factually correct and well cited atheism articles
+
:What?  Have you read those articles?  They are absolute garbage.  There's no reason for anyone to try to rebut them.
+
at Conservapedia created using the User: Conservative account the without being able to resort to personal attacks.
+
:Says the person who called JohnZ a "secular leftist" above.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:21, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:11, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
<br>
+
'''End of Sam's cruel objections)'''
+
  
My objections were serious, but no cruelty was intended.  We're all reasonably thick-skinned here.  VM, you sometimes baffle me with your choice of words.  As in [https://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/134#The_Blood_Moon "withering patrician disdain for the untutored mind"].  More about this below.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:33, 7 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::Crybaby JohnZ's charity case, the "Kurds", have their counterpart to Insana bin Laden (follow the money):
  
<br>
+
:::::::::::::The Kurds' Democratic Union Party (PYD), the Kurds JohnZ are referring to, has a military wing, the People’s Protection Units (YPG) the "international" office of Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the Marxist group at war with Turkey since 1984, causing tens of thousands of deaths and is listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.
::<big>'''SamHB, you are wrong.'''</big>  Most, if not all, the active Conservapedia admins know there is more than one User: Conservative editor. So does the owner of the website. On one or more occasions, I have received an email from one of the fellow admins saying, "Why did you do such and such?" I then explain it was one of the other editors of the User: Conservative account.  And then I either reverse that co-editor of the User: Conservative account's decision or I explain his/her (I say his or her to keep the veil of mystery thicker) decision to my fellow admins. By the way, your objections are not cruel, they are just misguided and/or haughty/vain. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:20, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::<big>'''No, YOU are wrong.'''</big>.  Let's continue this debate on my user talk page.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:33, 7 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Let's dispel with the notion that SamHB doesn't know what he's doing.  He knows exactly what he's doing.  He's trying to hurt our feelings.  And the more appreciative of the knowledge you pass along a person has, the more it hurts because he's slighting something that (after having discovered the depth of understanding you have) they allowed to shape their own understanding in a positive way. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 15:33, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Yes, I usually do know what I'm doing.  I don't "shoot from the hip"; I generally think carefully about what I'm going to say here at CP.  That way, I don't make dozens of rapid-fire edits the way some people do.  But I'm baffled by your claim that I am hurting anyone's feelings, or trying to hurt anyone's feelings.  We're all pretty thick-skinned here.  For example, I've been blocked about 20 times, once by you.
+
::::But, in all honesty, I can't figure out what you are talking about above.  I'm not offended, just baffled.
+
::::*"The more appreciative of the knowledge you pass along a person has":  are "you" and "a person" the same?  Who is passing it along?  And to whom?  Antecedents are sometimes tricky to figure out, and I can't figure this out.
+
::::*"It hurts because he's slighting something":  Who is being hurt?  Who is doing the slighting?  What is the "something"?
+
::::*"They allowed to shape their own understanding":  Who allowed?  And allowed whom?  And whose understanding?  Of what?  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:33, 7 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Maybe it's because you have a weak intellect. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:13, 7 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Oh, my!  I'm not aware that anyone who knows me, or knows who I am in real life, has ever said such a thing about me.  So I decided to refresh my memory about your intellectual attainments as exhibited on this site.  I was quickly drawn to this page: [[Talk:Logical_Flaws_in_E%3Dmc²]], though there are many others that exhibit the same problems, albeit less strongly.
+
::::::Now I've been around for over 10 years, dealing with the relativity issue, and my "sycophancy alarm" is quite sensitive.  Your writing, on the cited page and others, show a serious case of "relativity sycophancy", along with a profound ignorance of how science, both theoretical and experimental, works.  This is illustrated particularly clearly by your statement that ".9900000 x .9900000 x .9900000 = .970299...", suggesting that this somehow weakens or dilutes the points that AugustO was making.
+
::::::I suggest that you go to [[User:SamHB#People_who_write_about_relativity_but_don.27t_know_what_they_are_talking_about|this section]] on my user page and follow my advice.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:14, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::I think I'll pass.  We're way past all of that. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 04:56, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
SamHB, I enabled other editors to use the User: Conservative account for these reasons: 1) [[Sun Tzu]] is considered by many as one of the greatest strategist/tacticians of all history. He said to be mysterious for various reasons. What could be more mysterious than multiple anonymous editors? 2) After TK passed away, his influence at this website obviously went down (I was never a fan of TK). It occurred to me that if a prominent editor has a "succession plan" in relation to his/her account, it would be a better thing for multiple reasons. 3) The amusement factor. Frankly, it is amusing to see people rail at the User: Conservative and construct armchair psychological analysis of the account when the fact is that the account has multiple editors which makes their foolish strategy of personal attacks rather impotent. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:52, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Biden optics, back on topic ==
+
:::::::::::::The Obama Administration counseled YPG leadership to camouflage the group’s roots in the PKK after getting them to fight ISIS--they were rebranded the Syrian Democratic Forces, being promised U.S. weapons and money, which brought in other Arabs.
  
:Biden's scandal harms the entire [[Democrat Party]], and its leadership does not know what to do about it. If they defend him, then they implicate themselves; if they abandon him, then were does that leave the [[Obama]] legacy?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:35, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::The whole goal right now is to bring the activities of Obama's "foreign legions" to a close, not tally up more to Kurdish communists' killcounts. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 16:05, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
::For those who believe the Russians hacked the DNC server, one of the rationales given why Vladmir Putin hacked the DNC servers and dribbled out harmful information via Wikileaks is that he was attempting to show the Russian populace that the American system of government wasn't any better than the Russian system and to create disunity in the USA. For better or for worse, whataboutism is an effective strategy (If Russia did hack the DNC server, to a certain degree Putin was successful, but it wound up being a net harm to Russia due to tougher sanctions being imposed on Russia and Trump playing a large role in driving down the price of oil which is no doubt hurting the Russian which to a large degree is a petro-economy).
+
  
::Pointing out the sexual foibles of Biden (who was the top Democrat for 8 years) in an effective way, is bound to have an effect on Biden and on the Democratic brand as a whole given Biden's high office in that party for a long period of time. It also embarrasses the media (a big ally of the Democratic Party) because Biden's misconduct has been hiding in plain sight for years.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:39, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::And you have to study the activities of the [https://cryptome.org/ansar-al-islam.htm Kurdish Ansar al-Islam], which merged with Ayman al-Zarqawi]]'s group in 2004 and founded the Islamic State in 2014. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup>
:::PBS did a documentary of Donald Trump and they charge that Trump adopted a Hugh Hefner playboy philosophy. Newsweek ran a news story with the title [https://www.newsweek.com/trump-hugh-hefner-friends-decades-relationship-soured-673205 THE PLAYBOY PRESIDENT: TRUMP AND HUGH HEFNER BONDED FOR DECADES OVER THEIR LOVE OF LICENTIOUSNESS, BUT THE RELATIONSHIP SOURED]
+
  
:::If this is true, one could reasonably conjecture that the NYC liberal culture and the liberal, atheist [[Hugh Hefner]] (see: [[Atheism and pornography]]) had a bad effect on Trump. Similarly, one can argue that the evangelical [[Mike Pence]], the evangelical pastors who support Trump and the other social conservatives surrounding Trump are having a reformative effect on Trump. Let's hope that Mike Pence remains Trump's VP for another 5 years![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:59, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::::Aye. You've convinced me. What have the Kurds ever done for us, eh? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:56, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
::::Biden's downfall is more a reflection of the Millennial generation's impatience and rebellion against Boomers, Pelosi, Sanders, Trump, etc. They feel their time has come, and will coalesce around a younger candidate who speaks their language. Beto or somebody. Democrats always look for someone in their mid to late 40s. Hillary was the exception. GOP always takes somebody 55+. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:15, 4 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::::Well, explain to me why Kurdish [[nationalism]] is suddenly sacred and holy to anti-nationalist globalists right now, other than pure opportunism? I think we've made the case that "The Kurds" are a wide, diverse group. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 04:16, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
Bernie has a lot of young people support due to liberal/leftist indoctrination in schools and due to the fact that he promises a lot of free stuff to younger people. In addition, the baby boomers are being selfish. At this point, social security should be reformed and people should work as long as they can. If this doesn't happen, young people will have a crushing amount of national debt and/or the USA will eventually default on its debt and/or dissolve as a nation. The only way out of this not happening is if the current economic system became radically more productive via automation/robotics/artificial intelligence and the educational system were to radically improve so the human capital would become much more productive. This seems like a far fetched long shot though. I believe the USA will see another great depression within about 15 years.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:44, 6 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Which reminds me, we're going to need a [[Long march through the institutions]] article since Socialism is going to be the a big issue. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:10, 6 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== Why Biden's inappropriate touching is such a handicap to him ===
+
<---The Iraqi Kurds got their spoils of war for fighting alongside the US against Saddam, and later ISIS. It hardly seems unreasonable for the Syrian Kurds to get theirs as well. If Erdogan wants to secure the border to stop traffic between the Turkish and Syrian Kurds, then let him do it on his side of the fence. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:49, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:<s>I love it. "Syrian", "traffic".</s> [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:38, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::JohnZ, you still don't get it. Abu Musab Zarqawi, founder of the Islamic State, set up a chemical weapons plant in Iraqi Kurdistan, under U.S. protection of the No Fly Zone. Zarqawi merged his organization with the Kurdish Ansar al-Islam. [http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln&us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_general_topics=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_al_zarqawi___al_qaeda_in_iraq "The Iraqi Kurds" were co-founders of the Islamic State], if you wanna play stupid with words.
 +
::Saddam didn't have a chemical weapons factory -- the Kurds did, under U.S. protection, along with Zarqawi.
 +
::The [https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-four-as-of-american-policy-failure-in-syria/ Adana Agreement] of 1998 between Turkey and Syria allows the Turks to enter Syria for distance of up to 5 kilometers to beat back the Kurds. It's a legal treaty between the two.  The two have asked the Russians to be there to police the situation.
 +
::I've met brainwashed people by the mainstream media before, but you take the cake. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:39, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::"Saddam didn't have a chemical weapons factory -- the Kurds did, under U.S. protection, along with Zarqawi". Actually, it's more accurate to say both the Kurds and Saddam had chemical weapons factories, since [https://theblacksphere.net/2017/04/leftist-myth-busted-saddam-moved-wmd-from-iraq-to-syria/ several sources, including one of Saddam's top generals and even one of the pilots responsible for transferring the chemical weapons materials, verified that Saddam did in fact have chemical weapons factories, and that they had been relocating since 1991]. Said general, George Sada, even attempted to alert the British news media to Saddam's creation of chemical weapons and supplied proof, but they buried the story, deciding instead to just falsely tarnish Bush and Blair as liars. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 08:52, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"In the 2016 election, men were 11 percentage points more likely than women to vote for Donald Trump (52% of men vs. 41% of women), according to the exit poll conducted by Edison Research."[https://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/footnotes/gender-gap-voting-setting-record-straight] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:11, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::(@RobS, for the avoidance of doubt): It's times like this when it's hard to tell whether you're just really bad at basic research, or completely at Trumpian ease with arguing in bad faith to avoid retreating from something stupid you've said previously.
  
:You guys lay off Biden. The ''Washington Post'' says he was just being "affectionate". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 16:35, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Yes, Ansar al-Islam carved out a bit of territory in Iraqi Kurdistan. No, that was not with the blessing of the Kurdish authorities, nor did the Kurds have the military muscle to dislodge them from the mountains until they received the backing of US special forces and air support in Operation Viking Hammer, March 28–30, 2003.
  
The YouTube video showing multiple publicly recorded examples of Biden's touching young girls is shocking.  He's finished politically and should be investigated further for possible prosecution.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:36, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::And I've no idea what point you're trying to make about the Adana Agreement. It appears neither Erdogan or Assad have any intention of honouring it at the moment. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 12:07, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
:Google ''Trump kissing baby'' and then get back to me on that one, eh? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:17, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::"Kurdish authorities" HAHAHAHA! Careful. You're revealing you're totalitarian mindset.
::A politician kissing a baby. You are truly desperate. Trumpslide 2020!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:23, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Whoa.  If you can't even trust the ''Washington Post'' to be truthful these days, who ''can'' you trust? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 19:55, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::''N.B.'': This is rote sarcasticul.  The character of the ''Washington Post'''s editorship these days, as every conservative ought to know, has been fair to poor. How they avoid the scrutiny that they themselves impose in a biased way on others escapes my understanding and has caused more than one quizzical look on my part. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 20:19, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Vargas, ''WaPo'' gave Biden the moniker, "Creepy Uncle Joe" for being affectionate. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:03, 8 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::RobS, there's gotta be a place where the two descriptions intersect.  Or maybe it's just my horror of ambiguity, and they really are like skew lines, because one only has to do with adults and the other with children. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 01:37, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I think most Democrats are just praying that Biden would retire with his reputation intact, cause everyone knows the party interests' come before the individual (as Flores his accuser said). At some point I'd expect Biden to say he decided not to run for family or health concerns. For all Biden's flaws, no one has ever accused him of having an ego or messiah complex, and at the age of 78 I doubt it would surface now (unless somehow Trump emerged mortally wounded). As of today I'd list the prospects in this order: Klobuchar, Beto, Bootyjig, Harris. Klobuchar is the one that scares me most. The rest make Dems & Republicans long for the  bad old days of Barack Obama.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:19, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::What do you think of the [https://electionbettingodds.com/ Lott/Stossel election futures market?]  It has Klobuchar polling at 2.3% for the Democratic primary. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 23:23, 9 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Klobuchar is the only one largely scandal free at the moment, largely due to Minnesota's compliant local media that has never been interested in exposing anything and has bent over backwards since the 1980s promoting her. To find any dirt, it will have to come from the national media or outsiders. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:23, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
*To answer the question posed by the title of this section, being a liberal is all about feeling superior to Republicans. It would be harder to do that if the Democratic nominee was the subject of allegations of sexual impropriety that are both more serious and more credible than those made against Trump. Of course, the allegations against Bill Clinton are far more serious than those against either Trump or Biden. So I'm sure the Dems can figure out a work around either way. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:11, 8 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:*The uproar over inappropriate touching has not noticeably affected Biden's poll numbers. He is still slightly ahead of Bernie in both Iowa and New Hamphire.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html] With the other Dems positioning themselves as the wokest of woke, Biden could be in his own "lane." That is to say, he has a natural constituency among the 50 percent of Dems who tell pollsters that they just aren't that into political correctness.[https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-new-york-times-shows-that-joe-biden-has-an-open-lane-to-the-democratic-nomination/] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:30, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== More caravans coming ==
+
::::I have a simple question: When are "the Kurds" not "the Kurds"? When they are Shia Kurds armed by Iran? When they are [[Salafi]] Kurds under U.S. protection from Saddam in a No-Fly Zone? When they are Syrian Kurds taking U.S. assistance to stage terror attacks on a NATO ally? When they are Salafi Kurds and co-partners of the U.S.-armed Islamic State? When they are Qawqaz Kurds at war with Russia? When they are [[feminist]] Kurds fighting ISIS? When they are victims of a U.S. Army live fire exercise in Kentucky broadcast on ABC News? When?
 +
::::And why all this globalist promotion of Kurdish nationalism? I thought nationalism was the enemy of globalism?
  
Mexico is monetizing America's immigration crisis. It issues "humanitarian" visas to those who want to join the caravans -- and not just to Central Americans either.[https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/buried_lede_so_now_we_have_caravans_loading_up_with_migrants_from_sri_lanka_congo_haiti.html] The U.S. suspended the right to apply for asylum during previous immigration crises involving Haiti and Cuba.[https://www.americanforeignrelations.com/A-D/Asylum-U-s-asylum-and-refugee-practice-cuba-and-haiti.html] Trump needs to start acting like he's president. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 11:31, 5 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::And as best as I can determine, to the extent that "Kurdish democratic" forces exist anywhere (Iraq, Syria, Turkey, the Caucasus), they don't want a landlocked independent Kurdish state, knowing that without a NAFTA-style free trade agreement with their neighbors, they couldn't export their oil wealth. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:13, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
:Later that Friday, President Trump caved to Peter Ka's influence and "declared America 'full' as he warned illegal immigrants and asylum seekers to turn back from the southern border amid a surge in arrivals... He told a meeting of military officers and local officials: 'Our country is full. Our area is full. The sector is full.' Whether it was illegal immigrants or asylum seekers, the message was the same, he added. 'Can't take you anymore. I'm sorry,' he added. 'Can't happen. So turn around. That's the way it is.'" [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 02:40, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::You say "and why all this globalist promotion of Kurdish nationalism?" I'll give you an answer. It's because ''some'' globalists, particularly those of the neocon variant, see the creation of a Kurdish state as necessary to achieve their goals. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria are all opposed to the Saudi-centric regional status quo. That automatically makes them enemies of the petrodollar, and therefore, in the eyes of the neocons, worthy of regime change and/or destabilization. In that case, Kurdish nationalism would be a great tool for the neocons to use. For this reason, at this time, not only do I ''not'' support the creation of a Kurdish state, I actively oppose it.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:10, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
::Update: Trump later said he changed his mind and was giving the implementation of the immigration moratorium a year's notice to allow Mexico the time to adjust their own policies accordingly. So April 5, 2020 it is. Trump said "I'm calling it Peter Ka day since he's the one who gave me the boost." [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 10:51, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Actually, let me walk that back just a little bit. At this time, I do support Kurdish nationalism, but only in Turkey, and only because Erdogan's regime is still in power and there's very little moral equivalence between that regime and its Saudi counterpart.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:17, 27 October 2019 (EDT)  
 +
:::::::Personally speaking, the only regime change I'd even remotely endorse is if it's changing the Middle East from Muslim-dominated to Christian dominated, whether it be Roman Catholic dominated or, heck, even Coptic Christian dominated. Don't bother switching Sunni for Shia, or Shia to Sunni, or either for Kurd or Kurd for either for that matter. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:18, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::There actually was an opportunity for a Kurdish state 10 years ago in Iraq. The Kurds themselves didn't want it. Largely due to two factors: (1) their diversity and/or lack of unity; and most importantly (2) a Kurdish state would be held hostage to tariffs when it tried to ship its oil down the Tigris to Persian Gulf ports for export to the rest of the world. The Kurds of Irbil figured it would serve their best interests to remain within an Iraqi system and Iraqi parliament where they have continuous engagement, rather than having no influence over the Baghdad regime and being at the constant mercy of outside forces. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:34, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Well, then. ''Those'' Kurds are cool with me. They're definitely a lot smarter than their Syrian counterparts. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:48, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::We get little reporting on Kurds in former Soviet republics - Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia and elsewhere, as well as Iran. Here again you have secular (on the side of Russia) vs religious (on the side of ISIS) Kurds fighting each other. Then you have Shia Kurds fighting Sunni Kurds (ISIS). These same divisions exist among Kurds in Germany and the U.S.
 +
::::::::For these reasons I'm very skeptical when I hear anyone discussing "the Kurds" (like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcCN0DGvqE0 Bernie Sanders statement] here). I'll go a step further - Media, being fed by the [[intelligence community]], is playing on the deliberate ignorance of the American people, if not even a racial stereotype. The journalists who use the phrase, "the Kurds" are just ignorant partisans themselves. And this sort of Deep State/media collusion, appealing to what they assume are irrational bigoted stereotypes in the soul of the American people, is how the U.S. has blundered into numerous wars beyond my lifetime. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:20, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::User Masaman on youtube [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDlcJslnNqQ is one of the best] at [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z26S0XgduYc handling issues like this].  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:34, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
== New Nunes "memos" ==
+
Allow me to say this, plain and simple. The Kurds are not our allies. In fact, they border on being our enemies. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:53, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Let me clarify. They border on being our enemies in Iran, <s>Iraq</s>, and Syria.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:17, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::How do you cross out text? I want to cross out "Iraq."--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:48, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::use < s > for strike with a close </ s> <s>like this</s>. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:22, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Thanks. I wish Wiki would allow you to do that with a single highlight-and-quick, but then again we are living in the "learn to code" era.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:43, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
[[Devin Nunes|Rep.  Nunes]] to send eight criminal referrals to DOJ concerning leaks, conspiracy amid Russia probe.  They're not memos I guess, but to some, perhaps, they're unwelcome reminders. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:58, 7 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::@RobS: I'll content myself with noting that, having been called on talking rubbish about Ansar al-Islam being allied with Iraqi Kurdish forces, your response was to try and start a game of ''Well, what's a Kurd anyway?'' Spineless. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:40, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:Ok. Name the eight. Here's my list: Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, [[James Baker (DOJ)]], and [[Lisa Page]]. Others should be on the list, like [[Sally Yates]], [[Susan Rice]], etc, but they didn't testify before Congress. Baker & Lisa Page were somewhat cooperative in House investigations, but they nevertheless did participate in a criminal conspiracy. Perhaps their cooperation will lead to indictments of others.
+
:::::::If he's so wrong why do you have to exaggerate to prove it? I started the topic, he just sustained it. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:47, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:Here's where commie Dems screwed up: if they let Muellergate die, it would be the end of the story. But they want full disclosure. If full disclosure is what they want, full disclosure is what they will get, although it may take another two years and 35 more indictments. In this case, there will not be a Special Counsel, cause the DOJ won't be investigating itself. Most of these accused criminals have already been rooted out of government. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:55, 8 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::I was called ''what'' on ''huh?'' Facts:
::Attorney General Barr reportedly forming team to review FBI's actions in Trump campaign probe. Now this would still be the DOJ investigating itself, wouldn't it? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 00:10, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::#Ansar al-Salam, a Kurdish group, harbored Abu Musab al-Zarkawi after his flight from Afghanistan in 2002 when the Americans chased him out;
:::In a limited sense; the big players, Comey, Yates, [[John Carlin]], etc are already out, but not immune from criminal prosecution. Although given the precedent set in the [[J. Robert Oppenheimer]] case, removing them from national security affairs might be enough, however the 1978 FISA Act, Patriot Act and Amendments will need major overhaul. The [[FISA Court]] itself may be scrapped in the long run. Don't expect resolution anytime soon. And Barr's review will lead him outside DOJ, to CIA, the State Department and elsewhere.
+
::::::#Ansar al-Salam and Zarqawi were protected under the American No-Fly Zone in 2002 and 2003;
:::This will be a major 2020 presidential election issue. Anything Democrats or media say about Trump will be suspect as either illegal election interference or [[fake news]]. That's where Barr's review is headed. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:31, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::#Zarqawi and Ansar al-Salem operated a [[WMD]] camp in Iraqi Kurdistan under the protection of the American No-Fly Zone.
 +
::::::#Zarqawi's Organization of Monotheism and Jihad merged with Ansar al-Salm to form AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq);
 +
::::::#AQI became the [[Islamic State]] in 2014.  
 +
::::::Where am I in error? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:01, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
== Black Holes main page issue ==
+
:::::::Your error is a product of your usual bad faith in discussion. You appear unable to admit that Ansar al-Islam was engaged in a terrorist campaign ''against'' the  regular Iraqi Kurdish forces, and that those same forces drove them out of the territory they'd seized as soon as they received the necessary US military support. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:27, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Right. Where'd you get that spin? Don Rumsfeld? Dick Cheney? Ansar al-Salam merged into Al Qaeda in Iraq, conducted the insurgency, and established the Islamic  State.
 +
::::::::Ok, you got me. Ansar al-Salam changed its name to Ansar al-Sunna, and merged with Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Group of Monotheism and JIhad, Zaqrawi's group).
 +
::::::::''Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad was started by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, other foreigners, and local, mostly Kurdish Islamist sympathizers. ,,,Following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, it is believed that Zarqawi moved westward into Iraq, where he may have received medical treatment in Baghdad for an injured leg. It is believed that he developed extensive ties in Iraq with Ansar al-Islam ("Partisans of Islam"), a Kurdish Islamist militant group that was based in the extreme northeast of the country. Ansar had alleged ties to Iraqi Intelligence; Saddam Hussein's motivation would have been to use Ansar as a surrogate force to repress the secular Kurds who wanted a "free Kurdistan".'' [http://www.thefullwiki.org/Tawhid_and_Jihad#Origins] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:55, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Some Black holes have been known to be super-massive for sometime now - they have never been considered to be uniformly small and compact. Might want to change the final sentence. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 15:00, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Some light reading on [https://www.soc.mil/ARSOF_History/articles/v1n1_op_viking_hammer_page_1.html Operation Viking Hammer]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:15, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:Oh and pictures of stellar objects are often enhanced using a technique called 'false colour'. It is used to highlight images which emit non-visible parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. It isn't 'photoshoped' - it's common practice. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 15:38, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::The image was obtained using radio telescopes observing in the microwave/infrared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Andrew Schlafly would presumably have no objection if the image was presented using inks or monitors that emit only 230 GHz radiation (a wavelength of 1.3 mm, on the border between infrared and microwave). Such an image would of course be invisible to a human observer, since we can only see wavelengths in the range of 400 to 750 nm.  This is also not an image of the singularity of the black hole, which can be considered to be tiny; it is an image of the event horizon, which is expected to be quite large for a black hole as massive as the one in M87.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 16:06, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::The above criticisms conflict with each other: the first insists that black holes were "never considered to be uniformly small and compact," while the last comment correctly admits that they were.  A black hole (or even its event horizon) that is 24 Billion (not million) miles wide is fanciful indeed.
+
:::As to the doctoring of the photo, it is misleading and not disclosed as prominently as it should be.  Indeed, it is not a real photo at all.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:04, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::You have misrepresented my comment; I do not 'admit' that black holes were considered to be uniformly small and compact, I did not say it, and I did not imply it. It is misleading to claim so. The size of the event horizon of a black hole, the Schwarzschild radius, is directly related to its mass, and this has been known since 1916. A black hole with a mass of 6x10^9 solar masses has a Schwarzschild radius orders of magnitude larger than one with one solar mass.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 21:52, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I think you are getting confused. A BLack Hole begins with it's event horizon, that's the boundary that separates a black hole from it's surrounds and they can be truly staggering in size - this has been known for some time. The singularity in the center is tiny yes but the boundary of a BLack Hole is immense and has been known for decades if not since they were first proposed. Secondly false colour photos are extremely common, many images of the universe are false colour because we cannot see the wavelengths photographed. It is extremely common practice and unless you have some citations to show otherwise the main-page should be updated because no-one believes black holes to be uniformly tiny and false colour images are extremely common - it isn't 'photoshopped' as you indicate - the electromagnetic wavelength has simply been highlighted to show where the boundaries are. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 18:19, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::As stated here: ''The measurements are taken at a wavelength the human eye cannot see, so the astronomers added colour to the image.'' - https://www.stuff.co.nz/science/111936604/the-first-photo-of-a-black-hole-may-be-revealed-and-it-could-be-mindblowing. And here: ''To see the black hole’s boundary between light and dark, the astrophysicists captured radio waves—light 1.3 millimeters in wavelength, invisible to the human eye—emitted by the gas swirling around the black hole. The gas emits light of all different wavelengths, including visible light, but the researchers chose this particular wavelength because it can sail through entire galaxies and even Earth’s own atmosphere without being absorbed.'' https://www.wired.com/story/scientists-reveal-the-first-picture-of-a-black-hole/. It's a very common practice because other wavelengths, unlike light, are much less likely to be broken up and scattered by earths atmosphere. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 18:33, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::If the sun were a [[black hole]], then its event horizon would be less than 4 miles in diameter. Claims of an event horizon 24 billion miles wide is [[Star Trek]] stuff.  People have a right to believe what they want, of course, but it's very fanciful.
+
::::::As to the image, it's [[fake news]] to present it as an untouched photo as many liberal news outlets are doing.  It's clickbait.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:59, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::''If the sun were a [[black hole]], then its event horizon would be less than 4 miles in diameter'' do you have a link for that (remembering also that the stars that collapse into black holes and many, '''many''' times larger than the sun). And what are you basing your conclusions on?
+
:::::::Many news outlets ''have'' said it is a touched up photo. It is ''common'' practice because projects like this don't search for visible light, they look for infrared or the like. All they are doing is adding a visual colour to a light wavelength invisible to the naked eye. This is all very straight forward so I'm not sure what your problem is with it all given what you have said is completely unsupported and innaccurate. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 19:58, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Maybe they should “release the data” -[[User:JohnLedski|JohnLedski]] ([[User talk:JohnLedski|talk]]) 21:32, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Notice how quickly defenders of the fanciful 24-billion-mile-wide [[black hole]] (or event horizon) resort to disparaging putdowns of a critic.  Compare with [[evolution syndrome]], where the style of crass ridicule is referenced.  I've been respectful and again emphasize that anyone is free to believe in a 24-billion-mile-wide black hole if he likes.  But I don't any benefits or even [[falsifiability]], a fundamental requirement of science, to such a belief.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:35, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::I'm not putting you down - I'm pointing out two errors: No one believes all Black Holes are small and compact and false colour images are used to highlight the wavelengths invisible to the eye. You've yet to cite anything to the contrary. Why are these two things a problem? What is your issue with the size of the Black Hole? Why can't it be that big and what are you basing it on? I'm confused as to why you are so wedded to these false position so an explanation would help. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 22:43, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::John, the traditional view is that black holes are small and compact, containing nearly infinite density.  I'd previously observed this understanding in other entries here without objection.  See, e.g., [[infinity]].  I'm surprised you take such offense at it.  Search on "infinite density" "black hole" and see more than 11 million entries retrieved.
+
:::::::::::As to your second point, the "false color" gives the impression of visible light, which it is not.  Commonly done?  That's another issue.  It could be more honestly done in this case.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:41, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::I have answered that one already - the size of the black hole includes its Event Horizon. A ''singularity'' is the heart of the black hole but it's event horizon is included in it's size - just as the core of the sun is relatively small compared to the gas which makes up the majority of it' mass.
+
::::::::::::False colour is ''frequently'' used in astronomy as visible light is broken up massively by our atmosphere so we look for infrared or other wavelengths which are not broken up in the atmosphere or by passing through dust clouds etc. This image has only had the electromagnetic light filled in (otherwise it'd just be a black picture!). So the mainpage post is ''still'' incorrect. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 23:52, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::Also it is ''highly'' likely you would be able to see a black-hole with your own eyes if you neared one due to the extreme heat and radiation caused by the velocity in which particles are streaming round the edge. It gives off a huge amount of friction. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 23:55, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Creation#/media/File:Eagle_nebula_pillars.jpg this image] is false colour. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 23:57, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::CNN headline:  "This is the first '''photo''' of a black hole."  The Guardian:  "Astronomers reveal first-ever '''picture''' of a black hole."  Both headlines and accompanying images are misleading in the style of [[fake news]], as designed to be clickbait.  As to the other point, how big is the alleged [[black hole]] itself, if not 24 billion miles wide?  You might have a hard time finding the implausible answer, despite all the stories about this.
+
::::::::::::::By the way, "No Black Holes Exist, Says [[Stephen Hawking]]—At Least Not Like We Think.  Black holes do not have "event horizons" beyond which there is no return, according to renowned physicist."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:33, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::::It ‘’is’’ a picture of a black hole in the same way the Pillars of Creation I linked to is a picture of a nebula. You’re just splitting hairs - it is still a picture in which the electromagnetic wavelength has been filled in with colour. This is an extremely common process which doesn’t change the fact it is still a picture. Event horizons ‘’do’’ exist and you haven’t defined why you are objecting to the size. Why does it matter to you? The headline is demonstrably wrong and you’ve shown nothing to prove otherwise. Your objections make no sense. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 01:12, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::(edit conflict)
+
:::::::The literature on the subject of black holes has stated that the term "event horizon" is incorrect.  It has been replaced with a different theoretical construct mechanism.  Yet we have John Selway still using it, and the name of the project contains the phrase "event horizon", which, while fairly embarrassing, doesn't match the embarrassment of their refusing to change it.
+
:::::::The popular literature on black holes, and I don't relish it, is all over the map.  First they said that it was indirectly proven that there was a black hole in the center of our galaxy.  Then years later they said that the conditions probably weren't right for a black hole to exist in our universe at all, an opinion shared by Stephen Hawking.  Then references to black holes started appearing again by shame-faced scientists with no explanation as to what had changed. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:38, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::That’s amazing - it’s almost as if people can change their opinions as new and better information comes to hand.... [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 01:28, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::*You go away for a few hours, and look what happens.  Where to begin?  Try this:  The object creating the black hole at the center of M87 has been measured at 7 billion times the mass of the Sun.  There are many "super-massive" black holes like this.  This one just happens to be close enough to be chosen for the observation.
+
::::::::::*To say that "If the sun were a black hole, then its event horizon would be less than 4 miles in diameter" is very misleading.  The Sun isn't a black hole; it's nowhere near dense enough.  The correct statement would be that the Sun's Schwarzschild radius (sometimes called the "gravitating radius") is is 3km, so the diameter is 6km, or 3.8 miles.  For the Earth it's 2cm.  This is the diameter that, if the object were entirely inside that diameter, it would be a black hole.  Of course, the Sun and the Earth are both way bigger than their Schwarzschild diameters, so they are not black holes.  In order for something to lie inside its Schwarzschild diameter, it would have to be compressed to enormous (not infinite, just enormous) density.  Only the gravitational force on extremely large objects can achieve this compression.
+
::::::::::*The formula for the Schwarzschild radius is <math>2GM/c^2</math>, where G is Newton's constant of gravitation, M is the mass of the object, and c is the speed of light.  Plugging that into the mass of the M87 object, one gets a diameter of 4 x 10<sup>13</sup> meters, or 24 billion miles.  Not all black holes are small.
+
::::::::::*One can choose to believe that size to be "fanciful" or fake if one wishes.  One can choose not to believe any of relativity or the many observations that underlie it.
+
::::::::::*Relativity, and its many manifestations, are as falsifiable as can be.  Falsifiable means that one could design, or perhaps imagine, an experiment or observation that is contrary to the theory.  It could easily have happened that the Michelson-Morley experiment got a non-null result, showing that there was an "ether breeze" after all.  It could easily have happened that the Pound-Rebka experiment was got a null result.  It could easily have happened that the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, after accounting for the effects of other planets, was zero.  It could easily have happened that the GPS system requires no correction for relativistic timing anomalies.  It could easily have happened that the atomic masses of all isotopes are exactly  the sums of their constituent particles, with no correction for binding energy, so that, for example, the atomic mass of Radioum-226 is exactly 226.000.  But these phenomena are all observable.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:33, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::John, your quick resort to non-substantive sarcasm is unpersuasive.  Was Hawking wrong in rejecting [[black holes]]?  If so, why?  The theory of an event horizon contradicts [[quantum mechanics]] which no one credibly doubts.  Also, how big are you claiming this new black hole, supposedly having nearly [[infinite]] mass density, to be?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:34, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::Hawking's theory about the behavior of black holes (not a rejection of their existence in the colloquial sense) is one of many competing theories that seek to harmonize [[relativity]], which no one credibly doubts, with [[quantum mechanics]], which no one credibly doubts either. It will take a new theory to combine both regimes, and if and when we develop that theory we will see whether Hawking's version is correct or not. The black hole in M87 (it isn't new; it's been there for quite a long time) has a mass of 6.5 billion solar masses, and an event horizon about forty billion kilometers across. Once the mass of any object has been compressed below its Swartzschild radius, there is no known force that will prevent gravity from collapsing it further and further, until it approaches a singularity with infinite mass density. This is what our current understanding of gravity and quantum mechanics suggests; perhaps other forces arise under these extreme conditions, but we would never be able to observe this directly. However, another way to look at the situation is to say that the density of a black hole is the volume contained by its event horizon divided by its mass, in which case the density of the M87 black hole is closer to the density of air than anything else. Stating that the black hole has an event horizon 40 billion kilometers across does not mean that that entire volume is occupied by material of infinite density; it means that there is a singularity there that contains 6.5 billion solar masses, such that at a distance of 20 billion kilometers away the escape velocity from the singularity is the speed of light.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 13:52, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::Stephen Hawking: "There Are No Black Holes." [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes/]  As to your suggestion that a singularity causes an event horizon 24 BILLION miles wide, it is beyond fanciful (in addition not being [[falsifiable]], and thus not really science).  And it contradicts [[quantum mechanics]].  Religious belief are far more plausible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:12, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::Once again I can't figure out why you are so hung-up on the size. You have given no reasoning as to why it can't be the size it is. Why do you have such a problem with it? You know the universe is absolutely massive and is filled with things even bigger than this black hole is. What part of Quantum Mechanics disproves this? You have just asserted without any reasoning. If this isn't a black hole then what do you think it is and what do you base it on? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 16:15, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::Asking about the size of the [[black hole]] is an obvious question.  If you have no idea, then you can say so.  You can believe whatever you like, including a belief in a 24 Billion mile-wide black hole somewhere.  It contradicts [[quantum mechanics]], as [[Stephen Hawking]] has explained and as can be easily learned by searches on the internet.  How does belief in a massive black hole help anyone?  Does it help us alleviate poverty?  No, but religion does.  Does it help us lose weight or become more productive?  No, but religion does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:49, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::::Firstly you are getting confused about what Hawking said. He said the event horizon wasn't what we previously thought it was but that has nothing to do with size. There is still a point in which light and matter cannot escape and that is the event horizon, or "apparent horizon" as Hawking put it. ''It says nothing about size and neither does Hawking''. Regardless of what you call it - Event Horizon or Apparent Horizon is doesn't mean it isn't as big as they say and you have yet to explain why you are so against it being as big as they say. As to your other comments - how does the sun being as large as it is help anyone? Does the size of Jupiter help alleviate poverty? Does the size of the galaxy help us lose weight or become more productive? You see how silly that sounds? Why are you so against it being so large? You've given no reason. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 20:13, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
My take on this: we needed some evidence that black holes exist, and this latest image indicates that they do.  I took a course in remote sensing, which is used on earth to look for water, look at the results of damage from flooding, look for hidden man-made structures, and so on, all by using various wavelengths of light to get the results; astronomers do pretty much the same thing.  They will look at the entire light spectrum to find that which is normally invisible to the naked eye.
+
  
As to this "24 billion wide" thing, that could be overly optimistic.   Does that mean the whole image, including the yellow ring?  Or is there an object in the center which is much smaller? 
+
::::::::::Ok, that's progress. At least we're back to distinguishing "the Kurds" as between ''pershmerga'' and AQI. That link covers 2005, from Cheney & Rumsfeld's perspective. Now let's pick up the story from [http://www.aymennjawad.org/2015/12/a-complete-history-of-jamaat-ansar-al-islam their own history, translated by Aymenn al-Tamini]:
 +
:::::::::::''the position of general security official in the Dawla [Islamic State] currently [December 2015] and the man is considered the most important after [[Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi]].
 +
:::::::::::''In 2006, a deal was struck in the American prisons for the release of some of the leaders...
 +
:::::::::::''In 2007, the leadership of Jamaat Ansar al-Sunna took a decision to change the name of the group and revert it to the old name of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam....
 +
:::::::::::''When the armed revolution of al-Sham [Syria] began against the Assad regime, Jamaat Ansar al-Islam entered al-Sham and began operating under the name "Jamaat Ansar al-Islam in BIlad al-Sham."
 +
:::::::::::''On the third day of the Mosul events, the Majlis Shura of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam decided to come down and aid the Dawla [ISIS], and this meant the group came down on the left side of the city [east Mosul]''
 +
::::::::::Indeed most of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam gave allegiance, but a simple and small presence for the group remained in Iraq and the most important of those who gave allegiance feature in the photographed allegiance ceremony. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:47, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
The things about it I don't agree with involves the science fiction part of it; they are not time tunnels; you go in, you don't come out, and you'd probably get squished!  The light thing is a problem as well, for it implies light is matter with substance, and these scientists have never demonstrated that light can be bent and pulled in by one in the same manner that they can pull in rocks or planets or a dummy in a spacecraft. And then there's the Einstein worship.  He may have postulated the original theories predicting them, but it's kind of disgusting to see a bunch of astronomers slobbering over the guy as if he was the greatest thing since the wheel. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 02:45, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::You'll have to help me with the relevance of this. Were there ethnic Kurds in Ansar al-Islam and its successor outfits? Sure. Does their presence have any significant bearing on the development and legitimacy of a reasonably autonomous and functional Iraqi Kurdistan? Absolutely not. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:26, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
::Thanks Karajou. For the second time you've come in and provided some balance to what I was saying. You are absolutely right re: different wavelengths. Yes the center is much smaller but a Black Hole, in totality, encompasses its range of influence - which is the event horizon. Just like the center of the sun is much smaller than it's gravitational influence. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 03:04, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::These guys ("the Kurds" if you will), took part in the capture of Mosul, the resurrection of the Caliph, and were rewarded with the VP spot and head of internal security. They weren't bit players in the Islamic State. These guys killed their fellow Kurds, ''Pershmerga'', Shia Kurds, and anyone who wouldn't submit to the Caliphate. So when we hear talk about "the Kurds", "abandoning the Kurds", and globalists pushing Kurdish nationalism, it is not unreasonable to ask just what exactly are you talking about.
  
==Now isn't this an interesting coincidence?==
+
::::::::::::Pardon my thoughtlessnes, I forgot; there are good guy Kurds and bad guy Kurds; the bad guy Kurds are the guys who do beheadings; the good guy Kurds are the guys who take U.S. taxpayer money and kill U.S. NATO allies. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:27, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
Here are three addresses, see if anything stands out to you.(I'll number them below)  First, here is the address of the church in Chicago that hosted [[Elvira Arellano]].  Second, here is the address of [[Pueblo Sin Fronteras]], the primary group coordinating the migrants coming across the southern border.  Third, here is the address of the group Familia Latina Unida, the group that Arellano was President of.
+
:::::::::::::Right now, I consider ''all'' of the Syrian Kurdish factions associated with the SDF to be bad guys, even the non-Communist ones.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 16:53, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
:1: Adalberto UMC: '''2716 W. Division St. Chicago, IL. 60622'''
+
<--- It's kind of fun watching you twist yourself like a pretzel over this, just so you can ultimately argue abandoning the Turkey/Syria border region wasn't an unmitigated disaster. Ansar al-Islam numbered in the hundreds (including Arab and other foreign fighters) when they were driven out in March 2003. Shortly afterwards, ''tens of thousands'' of Iraqi Kurds fought alongside US forces in the invasion of Iraq.
:2: Pueblo Sin Frt: '''2716 W. Division St. Chicago, IL. 60622'''
+
:3: Familia L. Uni.: '''2716 W. Division St. Chicago, IL. 60622'''
+
  
Is it just me or is that one heck of a crowded church? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 18:53, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
Seriously: What. Is. Your. Point? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:14, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
:Speaking of Arellano, I took the liberty of noting how she was a Communist on her article since other than the category such wasn't really indicated. May need some work though. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 19:30, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I appreciate that.  I did not previously go very far looking into CASA, but it does look like that is Lozano who was a member as was her brother Rudy.  She founded PSF. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 23:50, 10 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Question Evolution book and an evolutionist pretending to be omniscient  ==
+
:He's right, Rob: Kurdistan was ''just'' about to exist for the 30 million Kurds scattered about near Asia—and then Trump came in and caused it ''not'' to happen, because all the Kurds had really been planning it the whole time and were really about to get together and make the nation happen. Really. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 23:39, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Well I thought nationalism was fascism. Now globalist are pushing Kurdxit, MKGA, and the Yellow Turbin movement.
  
Continuation of this discussion [https://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/174#Question_Evolution_book_for_middle_school_students Question Evolution book for middle school students] is given below.  
+
::JohnZ, you certainly don't understand anything about jihadism. Your frame of reference comes from your Western Eurocentric colonial imperialist and racist outlook. Jihadi groups appear, disappear, reappear, merge, change their names, and form alliances routinely. Leadership and experience are vital. 40 year old veteran fighters  are more valuable than a 20 year old punk who doesn't know anything. 300 veterans of Ansar al Salam make up the drill sergeants and the equivalent of an officer corps for radicalized punks coming from the EU and elsewhere. They trace their war against Western influences and Shi'ism back several decades at this point. An Arab figurehead was put at the helm - Baghdadi - but the Kurds were in charge of internal security - who gets let into the organization and who may be a risk and needs to be disposed of. None of this is rocket science. Sure, these experienced fighters had sons and kid brothers who came with them, but the organization traces its origins back to the end of Iran-Iraq war in 1988. They were the most experienced fighters in Iraq. From their perspective, their war against secularism, Western influences, and Shi'ism, was finally joined by ''outside'' fighters coming to their aid.  
  
"The obvious answer to why the book hasn't been published..." - Semipenultimate.
+
::In the meantime, the Hong Kongers can all get squashed by tanks and shipped off to the gulag cause we don't want to upset our Chinese communist trading partners.
  
Is it true that a Question Evolution book for middle school students has not been published? Exactly how do you know this? You don't know this.  
+
::And do you have any clue how ridiculous it sounds to say we should defend the Syrian border but not the Rio Grande? Especially since our Mexican allies, whom we depend on so much for help, just got their butts kicked by [https://time.com/5705358/sinaloa-cartel-mexico-culiacan/ the Sinoloa cartel who took over a town of 800,000.] t[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:50, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
  
By the way, is creationism and intelligent being taught in public schools, charter schools and private religious by teachers without evolutionists being aware of it?  
+
:::Once again: What does the presence of a small number of ethnic Kurds in various jihadi outfits have to do with the development and legitimacy of a reasonably autonomous and functional Iraqi Kurdistan? I've seen estimates of 400-1500 Brits who went to fight for ISIS. We've had our share of eejits who stayed home to maim and kill in the name of their twisted version of Islam. None of which has any bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy or viability of the British state, or its institutions, or its armed forces.
  
''New York Times:'' "Teaching creationism in public schools has consistently been ruled unconstitutional in federal courts, but according to a national survey of more than 900 public high school biology teachers, it continues to flourish in the nation’s classrooms. Researchers found that only 28 percent of biology teachers consistently follow the recommendations of the National Research Council to describe straightforwardly the evidence for evolution and explain the ways in which it is a unifying theme in all of biology. At the other extreme, 13 percent explicitly advocate creationism, and spend at least an hour of class time presenting it in a positive light. That leaves what the authors call “the cautious 60 percent,” who avoid controversy by endorsing neither evolution nor its unscientific alternatives. In various ways, they compromise."[https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08creationism.html]
+
:::It's not like the US is flush with regional success stories for all the blood and treasure it's spent over the past 30-odd years. You've got the liberation of Kuwait, and then you've got Iraqi Kurdistan as far and away the most successful bit of Iraq to date. Not much after that. You'd think a good conservative patriot like yourself would be proud of the US having brought a bit more freedom and self-determination into the world, but hilariously, you can't because that would beg the obvious question re. cutting and running in Syria.
  
Semipenultimate, you are not omniscient. Stop pretending to be.
+
:::If memory serves, Rand Paul clapped like a seal, whilst the rest of the GOP senate was aghast. They can't all be neo-con RINOs. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:10, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." - [[Sun Tzu]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:07, 12 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Just as an FYI, there's actually some evidence that Trump deliberately gave that Syrian withdrawal order specifically to bait a key leader of ISIS to into revealing himself and getting himself at the very least captured, if not killed, and that operation was such a success that you leftists were caught with your pants down due to not even your installed leakers finding out about the op (and we had the bonus of his second in command being taken out as well). To put it another way, Trump played ISIS like Palpatine played the Rebels at Endor in Return of the Jedi. I'll admit I was very unsure about leaving the Kurds behind, mostly because I feared we'd have the same thing as Vietnamization after the end of the Vietnam War where the Democrats exploiting Watergate sold out the South Vietnamese to the Communists. Since we just shattered the vertebrae of ISIS, I don't see any reason to be concerned about our forces staying in Syria right now. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:18, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:Ace wrote: "the easiest way to know there is no booklet is the fact that if there was one...[he] would never shut up about it."
+
  
:Ace, evolutionism is a key supply line for atheism. Ace, the [[atheist movement]] is dead (see: [[Decline of the atheist movement]]). In February of 2007, I became an editor of Conservapedia and by July 2011 the atheist movement was already deathly ill.
+
:::::There's much more evidence which says Trump's withdrawal announcement caught the Pentagon completely off guard, and they had to scramble to launch the operation for fear of losing effective force projection should the withdrawal be fully realised.  
  
:While there may be some setbacks along the way for Christendom in terms of the [[atheism vs. Christianity]] ideological conflict, the irrevocable collapsing of atheistic ideology and the atheist population will continue. By June of 2019, there will be about a net loss of 300,0000 atheists in the world during a 12 month time span (see: [[Global atheism statistics]] and [https://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/research/documents/StatusofGlobalChristianity20191.pdf Status of Global Atheism/Christianity/other religions, 2019, in the Context of 1900–2050] and [https://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/research/documents/StatusofGlobalChristianity2018.pdf Status of Global Atheism/Christianity/other religions, 2018, in the Context of 1900–2050]). Meanwhile the number of Christians is expanding in the world. See also: [[Future of Christianity]].
+
:::::I'm glad to hear you had qualms about ditching an ally, though. That's the proper response. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:26, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::Here's an immediate problem that hasn't been addressed now for two or three decades: the U.S. provided air defense and a No-Fly Zone for a group that set up a WMD lab. When it was discovered, the Deep State deceived the American people when [[Colin Powell]] went to the UN and blamed Saddam for it, when in fact the people we were protecting uder our No Fly Zone had created it. And this idiocy of the Deep State they blamed on Saddam as an excuse to go into Iraq in 2003. People are tired of these lies, and ain't falling for arguments about "the Kurds" and Kurdish nationalism again as an excuse to send troops into a war zone that Congress itself, under two presidents, has refused to pass an authorization for. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:49, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Wait, didn't General Sada as well as one of the guys who flew the chemical weapons stocks to Syria confirm that Saddam WAS in fact making WMDs, and had been doing so since before the Gulf War or something? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:38, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::I'm not arguing whether or not Saddam had WMD, I'm pointing out the historical truth that our friends, "the Kurds" had WMD and Colin Powell lied about it, which was the No.1 fact pushing Obama's candidacy in 2008. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:50, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::You'd think the answer would be easier to know—they spend a billion dollars to find out. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 18:05, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::I've never heard of the Kurds having WMDs. Can you provide a link?--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 16:49, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
:And with Europe/China experiencing a growth of creationism and religious fundamentalism and with Europe/USA/West headed to begin to experience very significant [[desecularization]] starting sometime between 2021 - 2050, evolutionism is doomed. In a world of globabalization, below replacement fertility of native populations and religious immigrants, global/NZ atheism/evolutionism is doomed. I feel no great need to loudly and incessantly trumpet the launching of any particular creationist book.  
+
::::"Ditching"?  The PKK succeeded beyond its wildest dreams:  It got a quasi-state in Syria from which to attack Turkey, and is now positioned to receive the "creamy" (your word) concessions from the peace process Erdogan initiated.
 +
:
 +
::::You have no standing in the matter: as a New Zealander (or globalist), you're not encumbered with the difficulty of possibly rewarding a disloyal president, the evidence of which demonstrated by the information that is coming out through Justice Department reports daily, though you probably love that ''we'' are because you share his politics.
 +
:
 +
::::You probably suspect RobS, Pokeria and I may have trouble articulating this sense and hoped your high-tensioned rhetoric would provoke us into being strung along by your series of objections and qualifications, however lengthy[, to Donald Trump's military movements]. If so, you suspected wrongly. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:06, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Trump and American evangelicals ascending power in 2016 is one of the birthpangs of things to come. :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:13, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::@Vargas: Who you calling a Kiwi?
::Ace wrote: "Who do you think you’re kidding here?"
+
  
::Ace, in 2017 [[Aron Ra]] admitted that the atheist movement is dead amidst many reports on social media indicating that the atheist movement is dead.[http://examiningatheism.blogspot.com/2017/10/now-that-that-poseur-atheist-aron-ra.html][http://examiningatheism.blogspot.com/2017/11/seth-andrews-keeps-hearing-reports-of.html]
+
:::::@RobS: How on earth did we get back to conflating Ansar al-Islam and their weapons plant with the Iraqi Kurds in general? For extra "protected under a no-fly zone" lulz, the [http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln&us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_general_topics=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_al_zarqawi___al_qaeda_in_iraq link you shared earlier] clearly states the US was aware of the plant from at least June 2002 onwards. Even better, they rejected an airstrike several times, because ''"...we were so concerned that the chemical cloud from there could devastate the region that we chose to take them by land rather than by smart weapons.”''
  
::On top of this, key allies of the formerly alive atheist movement are collapsing (trust in media falling, newspapers closing, right-wing populism is ascendant in the USA/Europe/Latin America while [[secular left]]ism is facing defeat after defeat, Trump is forcing China to bargaining table and they are bound to make their system more capitalistic, etc. etc.).  See also: [[Decline of the secular left]] and [[Atheism and the media]]
+
:::::That's according to Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong, at least. Much of the rest of your link suggests it was either simple dithering by the Bush administration, or due to worries about appearing too eager for war in the eyes of potential coalition allies.
  
::And there are many [[causes of desecularization]] that are not going away.
+
:::::And while we're at it, an honourable mention for this quote: ''"...Ansar al-Islam militant group ... controls a '''very small region''' of Kurdish Iraq near the Iranian border"''. (emphasis mine)
  
::Furthermore, religious fundamentalism is growing in the world and the pace of this growth is expected to accelerate due to demographic/fertility rate factors and other factors (see: [[Growth of religious fundamentalism]]) which means creationism is growing in the world at a faster and faster rate. And these are very much long term trends.
+
:::::What you reckon, then? One more crack, or have you finally tired of beating this particular dead horse? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:06, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::JohnZ & Geopolitician, Sorry for the delay and I don't have time to fully provide links here now. However, the bio I created on the Ratwiki website of Abu Musab Zarqawi contains the basic research and links of Zarqawi's flight from Afghanistan in 2002 to Northern Iraq, his merger with Sunni Kurdish jihadis, and establishment of a WMD lab in a Kurdish sanctuary under the U.S No Fly Zone. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:55, 15 December 2019 (EST)
  
::Now I realize that you are delusional and have a hard time seeing why New Zealand with its sub-replacement fertility rate and religious immigrants will become [[desecularization|desecularized]] (on top of this the global market share of atheism is shrinking), but I am a realist. There is so much writing on the wall that atheism/evolutionism are doomed. Bottom line: Unlike you, I don't double-down when I am deluged with signs that I am supporting a lost cause. There are times in life where its obvious you have to cut your losses and move on. Question: Why are some bitter ender, secular leftists so reluctant to admit defeat? Is it pride? See: [[Atheism and arrogance]].
+
== 4 resources which show America has a religious future in the 21st century ==
  
::By the way, when [[David Silverman]] gave his "atheists are acting like whipped, defeated and despairing puppies speech" in 2018 that was a gravestone put on the grave of the American atheist movementHave you seen [https://examiningatheism.blogspot.com/2018/09/2018-american-atheists-convention.html THIS EXCERPT OF THE SPEECH]?
+
I was recently asked about the future of American ChristianityBelow are 4 resources which show America has a religious future in the 21st century.
  
::Ace, ponder this 2018 quote from the atheist and evolutionist [[PZ Myers]]: "It’s quite depressing that movement Atheism has turned into such a joke. I valued it so much once."[https://examiningatheism.blogspot.com/2018/09/2018-american-atheists-convention.html]
+
Read this material:
  
::Ace, I repeat: I feel no great need to loudly and incessantly trumpet the launching of any particular creationist book.  
+
1. [[United States, irreligion vs. religion and demographics]]
  
::As Bible believers and creationists rack up victory after victory after victory against atheists/evolutionists, the importance of any one particular battle diminishes. Evolutionism is doomed and there is no shortage of evidence that atheists/leftists/evolutionists are losing the levers of power that stifled dissent against [[Atheism and historical revisionism|their false narratives and revisionist history]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:26, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
2. [http://www.sneps.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/jssr_15101.pdf ''Secularism, Fundamentalism or Catholicism? The Religious Composition of the United States to 2043''], ''Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion'', vol. 49, no. 2 (June) 2010, Eric Kaufmann, Vegard Skirbekk and Anne Goujon
:::Ace, watch this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTpa9j60Npg Evolutionism vs. Religious fundamentalism and creationism in the 21st century].  
+
  
:::I trust this video clarified my position for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:35, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
3. [https://thefederalist.com/2018/01/22/new-harvard-research-says-u-s-christianity-not-shrinking-growing-stronger/ New Harvard Research Says U.S. Christianity Is Not Shrinking, But Growing Stronger], 2018
Ace wrote: "What happened to the booklet...". 
+
  
Ace, if I haven't made it abundantly clear already, I have developed an appreciation of many of the things [[Sun Tzu]] wrote including the use of stealth. You may never know if the book was published or if it will be published. If you do find out, it certainly will not be because of me even if I knew. You want to know if the book was published and that is exactly why I will not tell you if it has been published or will be published even if I knew.  
+
4. "Among Protestants, Gallup has found weekly churchgoing to be consistent. In 2017, 45 percent attended at least once a week. In 1955, it was 42 percent."[https://factsandtrends.net/2018/04/10/protestant-church-attendance-stable-but-warning-signs-remain/] [[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:59, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"The spot where we intend to fight must not be made known; for then the enemy will have to prepare against a possible attack at several different points; and his forces being thus distributed in many directions, the numbers we shall have to face at any given point will be proportionately few. For should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear; should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van; should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right; should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left. If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak. Numerical weakness comes from having to prepare against possible attacks; numerical strength, from compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us." - Sun Tzu[https://suntzusaid.com/book/6]
+
:No. 3 quotes (then debunks): “Meanwhile, a widespread decline in churchgoing and religious affiliation had contributed to a growing anxiety among conservative believers.”  ''The Atlantic'', January 2018. This is what passes for journalist leadership these days (''The Atlantic''). It's not a description, it's an instruction for their hostile liberal-reader-wannabe-journalists.
  
"...when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near." - Sun Tzu[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:59, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:And now they have Gallup polls lending a hand, who we're supposed to believe don't know about non-denominational Christians.  They don't even pretend they have something positive to put forward, which makes me even less concerned about conservative believers, who can put their anxieties on the Lord, even if they believe the lies, than sinners of whatever variety camouflaging their sins by diverting attention toward non-existent problems, instead of stopping their behavior. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 15:16, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
:By the way, have you read: [[Essay: Ace McWicked, read this essay and start uncontrollably weeping]]?
+
::Ace (the New Zealand atheist), is either a liar, not very bright or stubborn (or a combination of 2 or more of these attributes).  It not that hard to understand. The nominal Catholics and liberal Protestants die out while the more committed Christians with higher birth rates grow. Eventually, there are fewer and fewer nominal Catholics and liberal Protestants to die out.  And among the [[nones]], most are [[theism|theists]] (at least in the USA). By 2043 for the USA (or sooner) and by 2050 in Europe (or as early as 2021), the secular population plateaus followed by a period of decline. In short, atheism has a bleak future. It's not rocket science. If Ace still doesn't understand this matter, it is a matter of willful ignorance.
  
:It's high time you licked your atheist/evolutionist wounds and admit that [[evolutionism]] faces a bleak future.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:01, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I think the reason why Ace has a bee in his bonnet and is obsessed with me is because all of my predictions concerning atheists have come true. If Ace wants to deny the [[atheist movement]] is dead, he is free to do so, but unfortunately for him, he will lose what little credibility he may have (see: [[Decline of the atheist movement]]).[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 15:35, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
::Ace, a quick question for you: How are those satisfactory answers to the [https://creation.com/15-questions-for-evolutionists 15 questions for evolutionists] coming?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:08, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Ace, by the way, I have never said that "atheism is a second rate belief system".  It is far below second rate and we both know this. There is no proof and evidence for atheism. In addition, you have atheists like [[PZ Myers]] and [[Peter Singer]] indicating that bestiality is morally acceptable under certain conditions (see: [[Atheism and bestiality]]). And while the Mormons certainly have their faults and I disagree with their theology, at least they weren't responsible for [[Atheism and Mass Murder|about 100 million deaths in the 20th century]] and at least they don't run an oppressive regime like the Chinese, communist atheists (and most atheists are East Asians with a very large portion of them being Chinese. See: [[Asian atheism]] and [[China and atheism]].  But the good news is that in China, Christianity is seeing explosive growth. See: [[Growth of Christianity in China]]).
:::Ace, you wrote: "I’m comfortable in my beliefs...".  We both know that you and your cohorts are far more obsessed with Conservapedia than Conservapedians care about your atheist/agnostic wiki. Who do you think you are kidding? "Nobody talks so constantly about [[God]] as those who insist there is no God." - [[Heywood Broun]]
+
  
:::Next, would I spend time addressing "15 questions for gravitationalists?". Absolutely not. Gravity is a fact and I absolutely know it's a fact. Live Science published an article reporting that Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling .[https://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/evolutionary-gut-feelings-belief-in.html]. Feelings go up and down. The reason you felt compelled to try to satisfactorily the 15 questions for evolutionists is because evolutionism is a castle in the air with no solid foundation. And because you could not satisfactorily answer the 15 questions for evolutionists, you desperately hope a Question Evolution! booklet for middle school students was not published or will not be published in order for yourself to "achieve" some small, cheap, meaningless victory. Now imagine for a moment the satisfaction I may be experiencing if such a book was published (or will be published) and I was watching foolish evolutionists repeatedly gloat over their nonexistent victory. Of course, you may not ever know if such gloating occurred given that I am a [[Sun Tzu]] aficionado who has an appreciation of the value of stealth/secrecy.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:38, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Ace, I hope this further clarifies matters for you.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 15:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
::::Ace, did I tell at least one Conservapedian if such a book was published? If so, if only you and your cohorts were not banished or largely banished from Conservapedia (there may be sockpuppet account(s) ). If this were the case, then you might finally know for certain if the book was published, not published or is expected to be published. But now you are in utter darkness about this matter.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:54, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
Personally, I really don't care whether or not such a booklet has been printed. The very fact that this website has to audacity to question evolution at all has driven Ace and the opposition nuts beyond belief for years, to which I say that's just too bad.  Deal with it. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 05:54, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Canadian election==
 +
In the recent Canadian election, the Conservative Party got 34 percent of the popular vote while the Liberals got only 33 percent. Yet Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau will continue as prime minister all the same. I hope that puts some perspective on the Electoral College issue. Trump got 46 percent of the popular vote. Not many British or Canadian prime ministers can claim anything like that level of popular support. See "[https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/canadian-federal-election-2019-liberals-justin-trudeau-win All time low share of popular vote is enough for Liberals to win power]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 14:56, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Yes, this is normal in Canadian/British politics -- parties can win well under 40% of the vote and win a solid parliamentary majority. Look at the UK Labour Party's election results in the 1990s, as an extreme example. The Electoral College still has a good purpose -- to preserve the federal aspect of the U.S. government, one that preserves the importance of state government. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 15:38, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Ace, you wrote: "All you do is post gibberish one to a website that I am sure I alone read, for my own amusement."
+
Our system is more democratic. No head of state is directly elected in a parliamentary system. Trudeau is elected party boss by Members of Parliament, who in this case sit a Electors. The voters of Canada do not have an opportunity to vote for or against Trudeau. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:32, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:IMO, the problem with the Canadian system is that power is concentrated in the hands of the prime minister, who can use said power to implement social engineering schemes aimed at pleasing himself. The one that comes to mind is bilingualism, the pet project of the elder Trudeau. It is quite obviously unsuccessful in the sense that no significant number of Canadians are learning a language because of it. Yet it has created a bilingual elite and disadvantages the monolingual majority. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:07, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Setting aside the poor wording of your post (I hope you have a good editor for your upcoming book. And I assume you meant to write: All you do is post gibberish to one website that I am sure I alone read, for my own amusement.). First, you don't know how many websites I post to nor do you know what I do off wiki. Second, atheists/agnostics have admitted that my articles are well sourced, factual and I make some good points ([[Essay: A British atheist on Conservapedia's atheism articles]] and  [[Essay: British agnostic acknowledges the reasonableness of a User: Conservative editor]]). Third, if you convinced yourself that you alone read my articles, you are far more delusion than I ever imagined! One of the most common fallacies of atheists is the [[fallacy of exclusion]] See also: [[Atheism and logical fallacies]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 05:58, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
== Atheists are badly losing. Conservative Christians are victorious! ==
::By the way, given that the User: Conservative account is made up of more than one editors, your tactic of mounting a personal attack was rather lame. :) Also, have you noticed that User: Karajou, who commonly uses check user, has never disputed the notion that more than one editor has used (or uses) the User: Conservative account?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:05, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Karajou, I saw your comment indicating: "The very fact that this website has to audacity to question evolution at all has driven Ace and the opposition nuts beyond belief for years, to which I say that's just too bad.  Deal with it."
+
  
:::Karajou, Ace posted at an atheist/agnostic wiki: "Oh and BTW [User: Conservative], I have been reading through some CP archives during my downtime in the office and I am wondering about this comment of yours...". Karajou, how many times have you combed through a certain atheist/agnostic wiki's archives while you were at work? Is the answer, never? How many times have you heard of other Conservapedians combing through a certain atheist/agnostic wiki's archives while they were at work? Again, is the answer, never? Karajou, it is very clear that I am a bee in Ace's bonnet! Ace is very comfortable with his beliefs? I doubt this very much![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:29, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
The big picture of the view of the world which certainly is important given sub-replacement level of fertility in the developed world, the sub-replacement level of births of the irreligious (see: [[Atheism and fertility rates]]) and the fact that religious people often immigrate (see: [[Religion and migration]]):
  
::::Otisburg is a joke.  We know it, the scientific community knows it, the entire internet knows it. And deep down inside they know it too. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 06:36, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
"By comparison, there were 138 million atheists around the world in mid-2019 – slightly more than the 137 million in 2000 but less than the 165 million in 1970. Atheism’s annual growth (.04 percent) is less than that of the population, and the number of atheists worldwide is projected to decline to 132 million in 2025...
Ace, wrote: "I am tall, dark and handsome - I’ve been compared to James Dean." Please see my response at: [[Essay: Ace McWicked: Vanity of vanities|Essay: Ace McWicked, vanity of vanities!]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:51, 14 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Ace wrote: "Then you'd have at least something to show for 2 years babbling about the QE! Campaign."
+
  
:My response: 1) You haven't shown that the QE! book for middle school students book was not published or will not soon be published. For all you know, I could laughing at you for claiming the book was not published or will soon be published. In short, this certainly could be another case of you being a egotistical/narcissistic blowhard who doesn't know what he is talking about. 2) Before the QE! campaign, Alexa showed indicated that ICR.org was a more popular website than Creation.com. Post campaign, the reverse is true. [[Duane Gish]] wrote: “As one who has debated over 300 evolutionists, I am delighted to see this Question Evolution campaign under way."[https://creation.com/question-evolution]  [[Shockofgod]]'s question and the QE! Campaign's 15 questions for evolutionists were both successes and their fans promoting them helped them be successful. 3) You still have not satisfactorily answered the [https://creation.com/15-questions-for-evolutionists 15 questions for evolutionists].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:58, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
Among Christian traditions, evangelicalism (2.19 percent) and Pentecostalism/charismatic Christianity (2.26 percent) are growing faster than Protestantism (1.61 percent) and Roman Catholicism (1.02 percent)."[https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/christianity-booming-atheism-declining-around-the-world-report-says.html]
  
== Media's professed bewilderment at claim of Trump campaign being the object of spying ==
+
And of course, while atheism lacks proof and evidence that is true, Christianity has an abundance of proof and evidence that it is true (see: [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]]).
  
"With the exception of FISA warrants, the use of human intelligence assets, the use of national security letters, & the unprecedented abuse of the unmasking process, the liberal media is absolutely correct, there’s 'no evidence' for Obama administration spying. Thx guys, great job" — Dan Bongino
+
[[Onward, Christian Soldiers]], marching as to war...[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 16:22, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday 18:37, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:It is not so much that the media disputes that the surveillance happened. They just don't think it should be called "spying." There was none of this semantic quibbling when Bush was president and the people being spied on were jihadis.[https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/04/12/sean-davis-absolutely-destroys-media-hypocrisy-barrs-use-term-spying/] In mediaspeak, if you don't immediately adopt their approved terminology, you are a "conspiracy theorist." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:18, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Wikignome72, I hope you don't mind my wikilinking that song to its lyrics here; I'm thinking it would encourage the troops! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:32, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I don't mind.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 18:38, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::The issue succinctly is this: [[Peter Strzok]] began the official FBI investigation on July 31, 2016; What was the [[probable cause]] that led to [[Stefan Halper]], [[Joseph Mifsud]], and [[Alexander Downer]]'s acting as "oconus lures" (outside the continental United States, see [[Obamagate timeline 2015]] late December), prior to July 31, 2016, and the in the case of Halper being a paid informant as early as May 2016? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:59, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Say hello to [https://news.grabien.com/story-comey-trump-winning-2020-ill-be-my-new-home-new-zealand New Zealand's newest asylum seeker], seeking refuge from [[John Durham]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:41, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::Once again RobS has zeroed in on the next logical question, and Peter, yes, if you use the "wrong" words the media calls you a conspiracy theorist, until the evidence shows the situation to be true, and then it's your fault for not dealing with the problem for which they laughed at and discredited you, and with which they refused to help you. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 02:03, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
=="A favorite lie" resurfaces—in Ann Coulter column.==
  
== Ilhan Omar's foreign tribalism concerns itself with discussing American values only when forced to and then in a contemptuous manner as she tends to her larger project of dismantling them altogether ==
+
Conservative political phenomenon [[Ann Coulter]] ran one of her satirical columns Wednesday, where she poses hypothetical follow-up questions to the Democratic candidates.
  
"Ilhan Omar is a walking advertisement for more restrictive immigration and refugee policies
+
The "favorite lie" I mentioned a few weeks back that appeared in an [[Elizabeth Warren]] debate answer, this time appeared in [[Julián Castro]]'s Twitter feed, a lie which exploited the sad fact of transsexual domestic disharmony or participation in prostitution, together with other non-bias homicides, by falsely portraying it as an epidemic of bigots targeting sexual dysphorics to the magnitude of a Presidential-level crisis, while the actual statistics reduced it to ten people total in comparable statistics in 2018, their cataloguer even noting "Trans homocides are underrepresented compared to non-trans groups."
  
"Nothing about her public statements indicates that she has any meaningful allegiance to this country or its people
+
Ann Coulter's satire of the political exploitation (because you don't know whether to laugh or cry about it), revealed a distinguishing characteristic of the offender of one of the remaining actual hate-crime homicides (which could very well apply to the others), pointing to how it would have been preventable by sane federal policies:
  
"Her politics are sectarian
+
:Question for Julián Castro (D-Texas):
  
"Not American"
+
:You recently criticized your successor as Housing and Urban Development secretary, [[Ben Carson]], for his remark that “big, hairy men" were trying to gain admittance to women's shelters. You tweeted: “19 Black trans women have been killed this year because comments like Ben Carson's normalize violence against them.”
  
—Will Chamberlain
+
:Just a few weeks ago, a black transgender woman, Daniela Calderon, was shot six times in the abdomen, hip and chest in Dallas by a man yelling homophobic and transphobic slurs. The accused shooter is an illegal alien from Mexico, who had been deported in 2010 and was committing a felony by re-entering this country. He was released on bond and has now disappeared.
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 20:47, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Question: Which would you say contributed more to the transphobic attack on Daniela Calderon — Ben Carson’s “comments” or our policy of refusing to control our borders?
:The USA fertility rate was 1.80 births per woman (2016) and the USA has an aging population.
+
  
:Feminism, consumerism, evolutionism, abortion, poor public policy concerning college education, a bloated federal government and pro-homosexuality policies are causing fertility rates to drop in the developed world. People have to have the right mindset and the finances to have larger families.
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:42, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Castro is near death and his days are numbered. Look at this chart under [https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_election,_2020 Democrat reports]. You can learn a lot about the American presidential election process.
  
:Until fertility rates rise in developed countries, there will be an incentive for businesses/governments to push immigration.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:06, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:In analyzing this chart, you can see the most marginal candidates have a staff of three who are paid between $1000-$2000 per week, and spend about $10,000 per week which includes flying around the country.
::For example, why is the USA federal government funding students with poor college majors with limited employment possibilities via government backed loans, grants, etc. During their prime time for forming families, they will be heavy under debt and have poor income prospects in many cases.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:15, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Sadly, Omar is all too American. She is a pro-abortion SJW with a headscarf.[http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Ilhan_Omar_Abortion.htm] Try that act out in Saudi. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:25, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:I think fertility rates ''would'' rise if American workers were paid more.  But businesses were greedy and paid non-citizens with little financial responsibilities, but instead were a financial liability to the community.  At one time they had the excuse that everybody was doing it, and they had to compete, and that there was an embargo on immigrant population statistics, so they couldn't see the extent of the problem.  But now they have the opportunity to right the wrongs to their fellow citizens, and many are still pushing politicians to sell out their country for cheap labor. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:24, 13 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I'd avoid discussing fertility rates. That is the [[New Zealand mosque shooting]] perpetrator's opening lines, "It's the birthrates! It's the birthrates! It's the birthrates!" [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:08, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::So if he says we should not bury ourselves under massive deficits, we should avoid talking about that too?  If you ask me, the mosque shooter's only goal was payback and employing contradictory rhetoric for the purpose of preventing the media from using him to smear conservatives like they did with Anders Breivik. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:28, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::The shooter raises an interesting point: he claims the white population of the earth at 800 million is bloated by babyboomers in Western countries who will die off between 2028-2038, then the 2 billion Muslims will take over the earth. I doubt killing a few dozen now will make much difference, if anything, when they do take over the planet, they may be a little more intolerant of Europeans and whites if everybody started whacking Muslims while they are praying. And birthrates probably can't catch up in 10 years anyways. If global warming doesn't kill us by 2030, we'll all be praying to Mecca 5 times a day. So what difference does any of it make? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 02:19, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::There's room for hope even in the dark midnight of the soul. The percentage of Christians in the world has remained at 33% for the past twenty-five years prior to 2015 and 78% in the United States as of 2015.  Donald Trump has called a halt to immigration, and is hiring [[Kris Kobach]] and [[Stephen Miller]]—two competent advisors to deal with the issues, one in the field of administration, the other in the field of communication and mastery of policy.  Demographically, hispanics are indistinguishable from other whites in opposing illegal immigration.  It's becoming clearer to young people that many here reject American values, but freely take American financial benefits. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 02:59, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Trump on Omar ==
+
:Right now, most of the disbursements go for paid staff. Later, media adverting will dwarf those disbursements. So you have three tiers: those sitting at home doing nothing and trying to rake in donors; those with paid full time staff in Iowa ''or'' New Hampshire; and those with paid full time staff in Iowa, New  Hampshire, and South Carolina. The size of those staffs vary from 2-3 to a dozen or more, hence the variation in disbursements (ranging from $250,000 to $2.5 million per quarter - which includes media advertising).
  
[https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1116817144006750209 This Trump tweet] should be on MPR. It is a response to Ilhan Omar describing 9/11 as "some people did some thing." Omar's supporters complain that Trump took this quote out of context. The context is her talking about Muslims being America's victims. I certainly hope that there is an innocent explanation of some kind. But it sure sounds to me like she is a Truther. She is no longer the black sheep of the Democratic Party either. The leadership is all-in this time around.[https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-shares-video-on-ilhan-omars-911-comments-2019-4] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:52, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:These paid full time staffers work the campuses, trying to get idiot, unpaid volunteers (that's usually how Democrats work). Hence, much of the media advertising (and debate schedule as well) is targeted at college-age students. The media advertising directed at students is intended to convince students that the candidate has big momentum and to get them to volunteer to be part of something. Steyer is probably the worst offender, and Castro a big failure, demonstrating once again white privilege and the institutional racism of the Democratic party, and  that the 18-25 year old group ain't buying Castro's extremism, which is very telling when you examine his rhetoric on the issues on a point-by-point basis.
  
== Political correctness ==
+
:Bottom line, "Money talks and BS walks." What I can't figure it is what did John Delaney spend $26 million on (putting him in the same league as Biden, Warren, Buttigieg and Harris, and above O'Rourke, Booker and Klobuchar) and have nothing to show for it - other than the fact that 18-25 year old Democrats are bigots who judge a white man by how much hair he has on his head. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:32, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
A good way to respond to creeping political correctness might be: "Everyone doesn't believe in the conceptual categories you are implying, like me, and since reasonable minds can differ, I will apply reason on my end in saying it places an ''undue burden'' on me to speak or respond as if I do believe in those categories.
+
::Ahem.  Do you ''still'' maintain that the large donors will surround one of the back-bencher Democratic candidates and provide them fuel to blast to the front of the contenders, that is, if they don't crater on the way there like Kamala Harris?  ''Skeptical political amateur'', Rodney Bigot (talk) 00:00, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Hard to say what will happen. Maybe Hillary, Bloomberg, or Kerry will get into the race. Maybe Steyer will rise to the top. It's gonna be a bloodbath when voters have their say. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:16, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::To illustrate the point, Beto has money coming out of his ears (see chart link above), [https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2019/10/25/beto-for-americas-plea-for-campaign-volunteers-is-making-people-cringe-so-hard-it-hurts/ but can't get any traction for volunteers on campus.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:14, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::So, what does this mean, the failure of Beto to gain any traction on campus? It means Hope. It means young Progressives understand the meaning of, and the need for, the [[2nd Amendment]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 08:25, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"To make that into 'hate' would be a histrionic leap on your part bearing a political convenience that is suspicious. Further, it may even be liable to the encouraging of personal abrasiveness as a means of bringing in from outside a negative reaction for the purpose of confusing it with whatever kind of intolerance that is being attempted to be proved.
+
== Hillary 2020! Let's get ready to rumble! ==
  
"And while I like to be polite, what you are asking for is for me to automatically respond to special pleading with special treatment. Out of charity, I have in the past, but unfortunately too many people have somehow taken that acquiescence and strangely distorted it into an admission of some kind of guilt, so, to be fair to myself, that treatment can no longer be automatic."  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 16:41, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
+
Clinton Advisor Philippe Reines: Hillary Has Not Closed The Door On 2020.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/10/23/clinton_advisor_philippe_reines_hillary_has_not_closed_the_door_on_2020.html]  
  
== France probed by aliens ==
+
I thought she might run given Biden's weakness as a candidate.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 05:56, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:I think she needs to stop wearing pantsuits though and perhaps given the upcoming rematch, wear something similar to what Apollo Creed wore in Rocky II.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 07:03, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
See [https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2019/03/20/twelve-french-churches-attacked-vandalized-in-one-week/"Twelve French churches attacked, vandalized in one week"] by Dr. Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart website, Wednesday, 20 March, 2019.
+
::That is ''not'' funny. Let me explain why: Hillary was a Senator and a Secretary of State and is a very ''serious'' candidate. If you don't support her in her quest, it ''proves'' you don't like women. And if you think women would be in bad shape if she were really the best woman candidate, you're obviously someone who has terrible taste for not agreeing with liberals in general, who are experts on the latest new ideas that always work out.
  
If we don't want to end up like France (with worse expected to come and for at least as long as Arabic descent is classified as a religion by the United States government), "the United States must act decisively to remove the Arab minority from within its borders...[which]...could be accomplished by initially offering encouragement and incentives to Arabs to leave of their own accord." — ''New York Times'' editorial prior to September 11, 2001 (with one political term replaced). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 12:00, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::You also didn't italicize the movie title "Rocky II" in your essay. More evidence of bad taste!! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 18:49, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
:If you feel that Arabs should be encouraged to leave the United States, then make that statement in your own voice rather than presenting an altered quotation with incorrect attribution and a misleading date. The statement that you misquoted was from a letter to the editor of the New York Times, not a Times editorial. The original quote, from Baruch Goldstein of Brooklyn, was "The harsh reality is: if Israel is to avert facing the kinds of problems found in Northern Ireland today, it must act decisively to remove the Arab minority from within its borders. This could be accomplished by initially offering encouragement and incentives to Arabs to leave of their own accord, just as the Jewish population of many Arab countries has been persuaded to leave, one way or another." The letter to the editor was from June of 1981. --[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 12:56, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::You are grasping at straws.  It's common usage for a reader to say they wrote an editorial if it appears on the editorial page.  And as for the date, I believe the Arabs were still Arabs, and the ''New York Times'' still the ''New York Times'' and America now much like Israel in 1981. And you don't seem to grasp that even Notre Dame aside, these church burnings are worse than any vandalism that occurred in Northern Ireland.  Even liberals have encouraged Muslims to co-exist, and they instead have escalated their discontent to a point where we are having to ask how exactly they were involved in a barbarism of world-historical proportions.  That I repurposed a "letter to the editor" about Israel's or Northern Ireland's distress to such a design is hardly act of exaggeration.
+
  
::But tell me, how did it occur to you to choose to play the informer on a conservative website? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 15:04, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Please tell me you're joking... There are plenty of women politicians, some of whom did a much better job than Hillary. Like, I don't know, [[Karen Handel]]. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 19:05, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::"There has never been a man or a woman, not me, not Bill, nobody more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America." - Barack Obama.[https://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/12316646/hillary-clinton-qualified]
  
:::Informer is a very strong word: it suggests untrustworthiness on both sides.  He's corrected a point of fact - one big enough to burn a hole in a dissertation.  When I'm corrected on a point of fact, I double check and - if I was wrong - I thank the person who put me right.  Call me old fashioned. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 17:59, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::In addition, it's her turn.[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/turn-now-hillary-clinton-makes-case-presidency]
::::''Tu quoque'' ought to be in your vocabulary, but evidently it isn't, and it's a literary technique (the giveaway was "with one political term replaced"—journalist double standards concerning Israel and the United States [*cough* wall] isn't uncommon knowledge to my audience at Conservapedia,—and I've done a ''tu quoque'' before) you've evidently never studied seeing your reply which could mean almost anything, but I'll take a stab at it. I didn't mention the advice to deport was conditional upon the premise of Israel not wanting to be like Northern Ireland, but lo and behold!  It's having the ''same problem'' of theirs we stand to face in the United States that we don't want to share nor did Israel—terrorism!  The Irish Republican Army in 1981 and world-historical barbarians, the Arabic-script-atta-boyed likely Muslim church burners in 2019! Eerie parallel, huh? Even the years match! Wow what a scandal—I bet the remnants of ISIS feel smugly superior about me for my use of journalistic abbreviation! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:22, 18 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::::Qui non est tu quoque.  QED.  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 08:26, 18 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::If it weren't for: the Russians, the terrible shape the DNC was in when she ran, sexism, submissive women voting the way their husband's voted, the mainstream media no longer being able to control the narrative and the electoral college system, she would have won. It wasn't her fault! She needs to be given a second chance!
::::::Hey, Rafael, what's up with the phony Galileo quote that you called "most influentual"? Was that really such a blow for science, or did you just like the fact that he insulted the pope, who at the time was familiar with and didn't condemn Copernicus? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 21:07, 18 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::It's about conviction and truth.  Two concepts central to conservatism.    Was that a genuine question or are you trying to pick a quarrel?  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 09:04, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Conviction? Lol, he avoided punishment by insisting his book didn't teach heliocentrism, which it clearly did.  And historical research cast serious doubt on the claim that he said the phrase (he who asserts must prove!) by the very nature of his "defense". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 12:27, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::And Galileo showed that he was picking a pretty big quarrel with the Pope by putting his position in a simple-minded way in the mouth of one Simplicio, a participant in the fictional astronomical dialogue presented in Galileo's book. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 12:47, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Let's talk about it on the relevant talk page.  This is not the place. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 15:23, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==Pokeria, Conservative and U.S. defense as a percentage of GDP==
+
::::The logic is inescapable - Hillary 2020![[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 14:12, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
[[Talk:Main Page#Venezuela and Interventionism|Further up on this page]], Pokeria and Conservative were discussing the effect of defense spending on the world's economy and international stability in general.  I was wondering if they had seen the exact figures of the proportion of yearly defense spending to yearly Gross Domestic Product, and if they hadn't, whether they think any differently after having seen them, or anyone else does for that matter.
+
==''New York Times'' floodwall breached==
  
My only comment is that after the Soviet Union dissolved during George Bush's administration there was a lot of talk about what was called the "peace dividend", which were funds that took the form of lowered taxes and re-prioritized spending as nearly everybody agreed that defense spending would be lowered.  But the records show that the spending wasn't that high to begin with—a maximum of 6.0% 1977 and afterwards.  On the other hand, I guess year after year it does add up.
+
No one spied on Trump--it's good they spied on Trump!  There's no such thing as the Deep State--the Deep State is a good thing!
  
The '''Gross domestic product of the United States''' is the amount of goods and services produced in a year by the United States.
+
Corollary: Then--How dare you attack our law enforcement community? Now--Justice Department is Trump's lap dog!
  
{| class="wikitable"  style="font-size:78%; margin:left;"
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 15:12, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
|+Recent United States defense spending as percentage of Gross Domestic Product
+
:Remember a few years ago when the study came out that [https://time.com/3858309/attention-spans-goldfish/ goldfish have a bigger attention span than humans?] ''NYT'' editors predicate everything on that scientific fact. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 04:29, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
!Fiscal year (begins <br />Oct. 1 of year<br>prior to stated year)
+
!GDP<br />$Billions<br><ref name="BEAGDP">United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. [https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp "National Economic Accounts:  Gross Domestic Product:  Current-dollar and 'real' GDP".] BEA.gov. Retrieved July 31, 2014.</ref>
+
!Defense<br>spending<br>as %<br>of GDP<ref name="OMBDebtHistory2">The Executive Office of the President of the United States, Office of Management and Budget (February 2, 2015). [https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals "Historical Tables: Table 8-1"], The White House. Retrieved September 29, 2015.</ref>
+
|-
+
!1977
+
|align="right"|$2,050
+
|align="right"|4.8%
+
|-
+
!1978
+
|align="right"|2,300
+
|align="right"|4.6%
+
|-
+
!1979
+
|align="right"|2,550
+
|align="right"|4.5%
+
|-
+
!1980
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|2,800
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|4.8%
+
|-
+
!1981
+
|align="right"|$3,150
+
|align="right"|5.0%
+
|-
+
!1982
+
|align="right"|3,300
+
|align="right"|5.6%
+
|-
+
!1983
+
|align="right"|3,550
+
|align="right"|5.9%
+
|-
+
!1984
+
|align="right"|3,950
+
|align="right"|5.8%
+
|-
+
!1985
+
|align="right"|4,250
+
|align="right"|5.9%
+
|-
+
!1986
+
|align="right"|4,550
+
|align="right"|6.0%
+
|-
+
!1987
+
|align="right"|4,800
+
|align="right"|5.9%
+
|-
+
!1988
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|5,150
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|5.6%
+
|-
+
!1989
+
|align="right"|$5,550
+
|align="right"|5.5%
+
|-
+
!1990
+
|align="right"|5,900
+
|align="right"|5.1%
+
|-
+
!1991
+
|align="right"|6,100
+
|align="right"|5.2%
+
|-
+
!1992
+
|align="right"|6,450
+
|align="right"|4.7%
+
|}
+
{| class="wikitable"  style="font-size:78%; margin:left;"
+
!Fiscal year (begins <br />Oct. 1 of year<br>prior to stated year)
+
!GDP<br />$Billions<br><ref name="BEAGDP"/>
+
!Defense<br>spending<br>as %<br>of GDP<ref name="OMBDebtHistory2"/>
+
|-
+
!1993
+
|align="right"|$&ensp;6,800
+
|align="right"|4.3%
+
|-
+
!1994
+
|align="right"|7,200
+
|align="right"|3.9%
+
|-
+
!1995
+
|align="right"|7,600
+
|align="right"|3.6%
+
|-
+
!1996
+
|align="right"|8,000
+
|align="right"|3.3%
+
|-
+
!1997
+
|align="right"|8,500
+
|align="right"|3.2%
+
|-
+
!1998
+
|align="right"|8,950
+
|align="right"|3.0%
+
|-
+
!1999
+
|align="right"|9,500
+
|align="right"|2.9%
+
|-
+
!2000
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|10,150
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|2.9%
+
|-
+
!2001
+
|align="right"|$10,550
+
|align="right"|2.9%
+
|-
+
!2002
+
|align="right"|10,900
+
|align="right"|3.2%
+
|-
+
!2003
+
|align="right"|11,350
+
|align="right"|3.6%
+
|-
+
!2004
+
|align="right"|12,100
+
|align="right"|3.8%
+
|-
+
!2005
+
|align="right"|12,900
+
|align="right"|3.8%
+
|-
+
!2006
+
|align="right"|13,700
+
|align="right"|3.8%
+
|-
+
!2007
+
|align="right"|14,300
+
|align="right"|3.8%
+
|-
+
!2008
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|14,750
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|4.2%
+
|-
+
!2009
+
|align="right"|$14,400
+
|align="right"|4.6%
+
|-
+
!2010
+
|align="right"|14,800
+
|align="right"|4.7%
+
|-
+
!2011
+
|align="right"|15,400
+
|align="right"|4.5%
+
|-
+
!2012
+
|align="right"|16,050
+
|align="right"|4.2%
+
|-
+
!2013
+
|align="right"|16,500
+
|align="right"|3.8%
+
|-
+
!2014
+
|align="right"|17,250
+
|align="right"|3.5%
+
|-
+
!2015
+
|align="right"|18,000
+
|align="right"|3.2%
+
|-
+
!2016
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|18,450
+
|style="border-bottom: 1px solid black;" align="right"|3.2%
+
|-
+
!2017
+
|align="right"|$19,200
+
|align="right"|3.1%
+
|-
+
!2018
+
|align="right"|20,250
+
|align="right"|3.1%
+
|}
+
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 05:31, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::This is pertaining to what? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:38, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
[[File:C9Pak4-W0AIldKy (1).jpg|right|300px|thumb|[[Jake Sullivan]]
+
[http://www.defenddemocracy.org/a-conversation-with-jake-sullivan-video/] to Hillary Clinton: Al Qaeda is on our side.]]
+
:'''Comment:''' The declines from 1977-1979 is the post-Vietnam "build down." The 1980-1986 is the "Reagan era build up," actually begun under Carter as a response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Note: the chart is a remarkable view of political consensus priorities; 1982 for example was a recession year, yet saw the biggest year-over-year jump of .6% (more than 10% of the Defense budget) rather than money pored into welfare relief efforts. Obama [[collude]]d with the KGB at this time to further Russian [[foreign policy]] interests against the United States in an essay entitled ''Breaking The War Mentality.''[https://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/obama-article-sun-dial-columbia-breaking-war-mentality.pdf]
+
  
:The declines after 1986 is the [[good faith]] response to the Fall of the Berlin Wall. 2002 marks the [[War on Terror]], which rises until Jake Sullivan announces "Al Qaeda is on our side," and culminates in the burning of Notre Dame cathedral, ''per'' [[European_migrant_crisis#Post-Obama.2FArab_Spring_Europe|the 2005 Zawahiri interview with ''Der Spiegel'']].
+
:::Ok, ok. You got me. It only took me a few days to figure it out. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Defense spending levels are a function of the Legislative Branch, which controls the purse, and not any particular administration. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:43, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Chuck Grassley caught sending code to RobS==
  
::But what about the 1921 Budget and Accounting Act which mandates that the President prepare a budget? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 23:17, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
This is obviously some kind of "fist-bump" compromising ''both'' of their appearance of withholding skepticism at suspicious government acts!
:::The President proposes, the Congress disposes. The declines in funding since 2010 was a Republican congress. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:08, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Thank you for calling my chart remarkable. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 00:39, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
===References===
+
:All of the delays and excuses why the Horowitz IG FISA report isn’t public yet after several months of anticipation of its issues leads me to the suspicion it’s going to be “deep six” by the deep state (Chuck Grassley, October 21, 2019, 5:59 pm)
{{reflist|2}}
+
  
== Potential news story ==
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 18:18, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:It's probably in excess of 800 pages and won't be out til after Thanksgiving.
  
Obama and [https://edition-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html the Mueller report] [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 18:37, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:More recent developments are:
:Great suggestionThe story is excellent and very credible. Posted, thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:27, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:#McCabe turned down a plea deal, which means it goes before a grand jury now (Comey and McCabe are already at odds over whether Comey approved the leaks that got McCabe fired);
 +
:#Brennan swore under oath the ''Steele dossier'' had nothing to do with his January 3, 2017 ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian meddling; Comey has an email telling staff that Brennan insisted they include it.
 +
:#Comey's "I hope you can see your way to let this go" memo alleging Trump was trying to obstruct justice by interfering in the Flynn investigation is BS cause the DOJ cleared Flynn of allegations two weeks earlier.
 +
:#Flynn will walk.
 +
:#Mueller prosecutors may be reprimanded.
 +
:#Clapper's gonads are in a vice over two leaks now, one to Jake Tapper over the news hook to report the pee-pee memo, and secondly okaying the kill shot on Flynn.  Clapper already gave the [[Nuremberg Defense]] on CNN, "I was just following Der Fuhrer Obama's orders."
 +
:#[[Mifsud]] and [[Halper]] have been trying to frame Flynn since 2014, probably on Brennan, Clapper, and Der Fuhrer's orders, cause Flynn knew about Obama's order to Brennan to arm ISIS.
 +
:#FISA abuse had been occurring since June 2012, when Obama was running for re-election, and after they got caught using the IRS to target political opponents.  
 +
:#The same names of American citizens (i.e. Republicans and the Trump campaign) were illegally entered over and over and over again in the FISA database to provide real time monitoring between November 2015 (when Mifsud and Halper first started working on Papadopoulos) and May 2016 (when [[Adm. Rogers]] shut it down and Hillary, Obama, and the DNC hired FusionGPS).
 +
:All in all, the break-in at the Watergate Hotel, where the burglars got caught before they planted a wire, looks like a church picnic compared to Obama/DNC spying on the opposition and corruption. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:27, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::The views on this page are going nuts...on a Saturday night.  Imagine that.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:23, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::The "wiretapping" not ending until May 2016 was thus during the entire Republican nomination process. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:54, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::That's why Fusion GPS took over, cause Adm. Rogers of the NSA cut them off from access to the database. FusionGPS' job was to develop supposed information so they could go to the FISA court and get legal authority to wiretap. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:14, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Lol. Creeps. I had guessed from the incomplete timeline I put together in my head the administration came up with the snooping idea at some point in the campaign, having been startled at some point.  Not this continuous series of spying abuses, start to finish.  I guess Obama took the idea he talked about wanting to be Spiderman (being able to use all those hi-tech gadgets Peter Parker came up with) too much to heart (to the point of massive illegality)! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 08:37, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:
 +
::::Or: Obama got away with Benghazi, so, he thought, dig deeply enough to stand under Trump and give a big enough push, and any of Trump's center of gravity beyond legality will carry him over the fence into criminalityExcept Trump was clean. This calls for some crowing, but I'm not going to give Obama's corrupt buddies any more of my clever idea-pictures to rally against! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 08:56, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::I think the "Oconus lures" episode ([[Obamagate_timeline_2015#December_2015|December 2015]]) shows the Obama administration was prepared to frame a "Russia collusion hoax" against ''whoever'' the GOP nominee would be (Rubio, Cruz, etc.). They were hoping it would be Trump, cause in everyone's estimation at the time Trump would be the easiest for Hillary to beat. You will recall, it was reported in March 2016 (before primaries ended) that [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html Trump had received $2 billion in free publicity], as he was being heavily promoted by CNN at that time. This implies collusion at a deeper level.
 +
:::::Much of that collusion followed Nixon's model in 1972; Nixon's "ratf*****s" job was to sabotage the campaigns of Nixon's more serious rivals, such as Ed Muskie, and promote a radical fringe candidate - George McGovern.  As this fact became known in 1973, deliberate meddling in the opposition parties internal primary process, became more of a public outrage than the actual Watergate breakin, which was actually a failure cause they  got busted before a wire could be planted. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 12:42, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
== Why right-wing populism will triumph ==
  
== The FBI's Hillary "coverup operation" ==
+
*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-behind-the-rise-of-radicalism-here-are-some-theories/2019/10/09/d88f4c62-eac2-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html What’s behind the rise of radicalism? Here are some theories] By Megan McArdle, ''Washington Post'', Oct. 9, 2019
  
Judicial Watch got the FBI to hand over some papers under the Freedom of Information Act concerning the bureau's efforts to protect Hillary Clinton in 2016. It seems that treason gets a smiley face from the FBI and a yawn from the mainstream media: “It’s all part of the Hilary coverup operation. 😊”[https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/04/hows-the-cover-up-going.php] The name of the FBI agent who made this comment is redacted. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:34, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
*[https://quillette.com/2019/05/27/how-progressivism-enabled-the-rise-of-the-populist-right/ How Progressivism Enabled the Rise of the Populist Right], [[Eric Kaufmann]], ''Quillette'', 2019
  
== Notre Dame rebuilding -- Christian cathedral? ==
+
*[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/08/shawn-rosenberg-democracy-228045 The Shocking Paper Predicting the End of Democracy], By RICK SHENKMAN, ''Politico'',  September 08, 2019
  
LifeSiteNews published an article yesterday asking a question I had also been asking since the fire: [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/will-france-rebuild-notre-dame-as-a-catholic-church] Will the French government rebuild the cathedral as a fully Christian/Roman Catholic cathedral as it had been before, or whether the government will promote secular values in the rebuilding designs. The fire could easily have been accidental (which I think is the most likely cause right now), but it's hard to be sure, especially with this in mind. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:47, 19 April 2019 (EDT)
+
*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/10/the-rise-of-populism-shouldnt-have-surprised-anyone/ The rise of populism shouldn’t have surprised anyone], ''Washington Post'', 2017
:Personally, I don't believe it was an accident. Demographic changes in France and anti-discrimination laws give a high probability at least one construction worker was non-Christian. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:14, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::Actually, much more than just one worker -- as of 2016, only half of French people even claim to be Christian, and that number is probably even lower in Paris. Probably less than 10% of the French (I'm guessing) attend church. So, many of the construction workers likely are not Christians. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:25, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Notre Dame was a such well-known fire hazard that the firefighters had practiced for almost exactly the scenario that actually occurred. See "[http://www.oneworldmedia.us/news/notre-dame-attic-was-known-as-the-forest-and-it-burned-like-one/ Notre-Dame Attic Was Known as ‘the Forest.’ And It Burned Like One]." The attic was full of beams that had been drying since Middle Ages. There was flammable material on site because of restoration work. The article above lists two other fires in France in recent years that were linked to restoration work. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:41, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Hmmm. Whose the source of that article? The French government? Mainstream media? the ''NYT''? Think anybody believes it? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:44, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::This is from ''The Times''. Investigating a run-of-the-mill house fire takes about four weeks. If there is evidence of arson, it can take even longer. Until we have a report, there is no way to know what happened. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:24, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Notre Dame Cathedral was the subject of an architecture study in which every square inch of it was mapped using lasers.  So they can restore it exactly the way it was if they wish to and can employ the needed skill. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 04:00, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Arabic and English speakers mocked the destruction of Notre Dame Cathedral on Facebook.  If I were a Frenchman I would see to it that the tongue would be pulled out of anyone reckless enough to abuse the French language through the act of taking the opportunity of this downfall to vilify the Virgin Mary’s Cathedral with their spoken words. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 04:12, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::C'mon, we all know [[Crowdstrike]] blew up the [https://www.nbcnews.com/video/flashback-the-destruction-of-the-buddhas-of-bamiyan-409457219869 Afghan Buddhas], faked Obama's birth certificate, killed [[Seth Rich]] and probably burnt down Notre Dame cathedral. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:37, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Wow, it all started with a rich Ukrainian donor to the Clinton Foundation—and they got Hillary too to discredit Russia! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 14:16, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
*'''Confirmation:''' [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/04/20/modern-architects-want-glass-roof-steel-spire-minaret-notre-dame/ "Modernists Want Glass Roof, Steel Spire, or Minaret for Notre Dame"] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:14, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
*[https://www.businessinsider.com/global-recession-could-boost-far-right-populism-in-us-worldwide-2019-8 Trump rode an 'us versus them' populism all the way to the White House. A global recession could take it to dangerous levels], ''Business Insider'', 2019
  
== Nothing But Cannabis ==
+
*[https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/interview/civic-tech-expert-the-alliance-between-new-media-and-anti-establishment-forces-is-powerful/ Civic tech guru: Trump, Breitbart and populism are ‘the new normal’], 2017
  
"Call it weed, marijuana or cannabis: 420 is a time to celebrate the growing acceptance of its healing pleasures:  More states are welcoming pot with open arms. Legalization is coming, despite the remaining anti-science moralizers."
+
It seems like the media elites are starting to come out of their denialism and are beginning to recognize that right-wing populism is not a temporary blip on the radar.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 14:21, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
How about that? According to the corporation NBC's Hot Take, now it's the pleasures ''themselves'' that are healing, not just the alleged—and conveniently alleged—many superior medicinal properties.  Who would have thought that that subtle change would suddenly be introduced?
+
:Shouldn't I get a virtual private network before I click these? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:28, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Sorry, no time to talk about that. At any rate cheering not only its use (for pleasure), but the ''increase'' of its use (for pleasure) suggests to me that the bloom is off the rose after having taken conservatives into their counsels to weigh its narrowly defined medicinal use under the cloak of their respectability—and whose opinions haven't changed otherwise—because someone suddenly stood up and said "I have an idea for a new way of doing things! After having helped us, let's ''exclude'' conservatives from our counsels and ignore them altogether when we discuss it in public!"  Wow! Say, how've these kinds of new ideas of the socialist brand by our lately socialist-infused liberals worked out in the past?
+
:Which "right-wing populism" do you speak of? The America-centric version that Trump promotes? The National Globalist version that Putin promotes? Or the version that followers of Ron Paul promote? Those are very different -- and incompatible -- versions. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 11:57, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Well, let's see then—I guess we're at the mercy of these strangely political-action-shackling ''non sequiturs'' of the liberal practices of social co-operation, so it's up to us to helplessly cope with the proven side effects rather than exercise a share in its regulation, side effects such as: gateway drug to our fatality-strewn opium epidemic and syndromes of other dangerous drugs, [lung cancer,] venereal disease (especially deadly for men), low motivation (at length endangering self-esteem), organized crime (do the police want to risk their lives to protect your ability to do nothing?)
+
::"right wing populism" is a pejorative term coined by leftists to mean "proto-fascist". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 12:09, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
At this point, we have to confess the epithet Nothing But Cannabis turned out to be too strong—in favorability.  All unfolded, it's got nothing to do with pharmaceutical science. It's really Nothing But Crap. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 12:06, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==Site metrics==
:420? Pot smokers are celebrating Hitler's birthday? it figures. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:18, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Hello Andy, what page hit metrics do you have lately on a per-page basis?
::The two holiest days on the liberal calendar are Hitler's birthday on April 20 and Lenin's birthday on April 22 (Earth Day). [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:23, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:What single page over the last 15 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:What single page over the last 90 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:What single page over the last 180 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:If you don't have metrics, how hard is it to install/upgrade?[[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 01:17, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Upgrading to newest version of Wikimedia would mean losing the view counters on the bottom of pages. So Andy does not want to do it. Many editors like to see the view counters.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 09:33, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::So the only way to get single page metrics is a newer version of Wikimedia? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 09:49, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::For the record, I also like the view counters since they're very useful, so I would want any new Wikimedia version to keep that feature. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:37, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::I am not a Wikimedia expert. I just know the last version of the Wikimedia software that had view counters is the version we have. We upgraded to the version we have because it is mobile friendly in terms of site visitors.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:54, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::I also think the view counters is useful in total, it just doesn't help in any other way.  Sure that page has 120,000 page views but 119,000 of them were before you even made edits to the page.  I guess the three questions I have are these:
 +
::::::1) What '''other''' way is there to get metrics besides the Wikimedia software.  I hadn't assumed that upgrading the entire site was the answer at the outset.  Sounds like a whole lot of work and headache if a simple modular snap-in isn't available.
 +
::::::2) Where does the assumption come from that the total view counters go away?  Total views is in itself a metric, and anything that didn't have that number would be equally just as useless. You just now have a much more comprehensive tool for metrics, including total views.
 +
::::::3) Nobody sees the value in internal trends? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 13:29, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
  
== Biden to announce? ==
+
:::::::All that information is available at [https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:PopularPages Popular Pages]. A page needs 75,000 views to be ranked in the top 500. If it hasn't done it in the first year, it may take 10 years. Popular pages gives you more information to analyze - what pages a particular article or subject is competing with. For example, right now [[Dinosaur]] ranks just ahead of [[Jesus Christ]]; [[Hillary Clinton]] has been closing in [[Joe Biden]] since Biden announced his candidacy; [[George Soros]] has passed up old staples like [[Joe McCarthy]] and [[Alger Hiss]], etc.
  
If Biden announces on Wednesday, as the famously indecisive former vice president may or may not do, he will become the twentieth Democrat to enter the overcrowded 2020 race. It's almost a year away from the first primary and [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-interest-in-2020-already-at-election-day-levels interest in 2020 is already at election day levels]. My YouTube feed is already full of political ads, as if campaign season was in full swing. Hey, I watch Ben Shapiro, Ten Minute Bible Hour, and astronomy videos. They must have money to burn.<br/>We've seen the rise and fall of Warren, Harris, and Beto. The latest polls are dominated by Biden and Bernie, with Biden edging out Bernie by about five points. Buttigieg, last week's savior, has slipped to fifth place. [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html]<br/>Warren's campaign collapsed when it was revealed that she is not in fact an American Indian. But the others rose and fell for no obvious reason. Perhaps there is a circle of power brokers that designates one candidate or the other to be flavor of the week. I'm not sure what to make of this behavior. Why doesn't the media just cover the frontrunners, like in a normal campaign? Of course, if they did we would complain about "horse race coverage."<br/>Eighty two percent of Dem women say they don't care that Biden feels up women. Last year, Biden joined the anti-Kavanaugh mob. Now he benefits from the fact that the country is fed up with Me-Tooism. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 12:09, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::You find opportunities, as well. For example, [[Revolution]] is ranked No. 42 w/418K views. The article stinks. It's just as pale and thin as [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution Wikipedia's Revolution]. So obviously there is much interest among readers in this subject which is not being served by either Wikipedia or Conservapedia.
:Biden has to answer [https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived these charges], directly related to Hillary-Ukraine collusion to interfere in the 2016 elections and American democracy currently under investigation by Barr and the FBI. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:38, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::John Lott's British futures market has Sanders 19.1% in the lead, not Biden 16.8%, Harris 16.3%, not Buttigieg 13.8% but O'Rourke 8.0% as the fifth place no-hoper and sixth-place Warren even less at 3.9%. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 13:42, 20 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I won't keep doing this, but just to show the volatility, now it's Sanders 20.4%, Harris 16.3%, Biden 15.9%, Buttigieg 13.3%, O'Rourke 8.2% and Warren in 7th place at 3.8%. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 04:51, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::In an age of the internet, Biden will not be able withstand the torrent of Biden groping women/children videos/memes. The battle is over before it has begun.  
+
  
:::"Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” - [[Sun Tzu]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:18, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::The top 100 (of 45,000 articles) shows where viewer interest is at. There are pages moving up fast (Soros, Obama administration, Clinton body count, etc. Donald Trump is about to overtake [[Kangaroo]], which was a big hit in the early days. Some are stagnant; [[Al Gore]] has sat at #69 for a full year now. Others are fading from view (FDR, New Deal, etc. no longer rank in the top 100). These indicators give a sense of reader interest and trends. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:56, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
::::Harris, Butigieg, and Klobuchar are the only viable candidates, with an outside chance to Beto. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:27, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Watch Harris and Klobuchar. By keeping quiet, they make no mistakes, just raking in donor cash right now. The challenge is to keep quiet for 9 months while building name exposure. It's unlikely we'd see an all female ticket, and Beto & Buttigieg bring no experience to the ticket (Beto could be a viable VP pick to make Texas competitive). We can learn much from the rise and fall of Buttigieg, who being the express image of Marxist glory, will eventually crash and burn. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:52, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::If Bernie wants the nomination, he'll have to go through Neera Tanden and the Clinton loyalists.[https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/bernie-sanders-democratic-party-2020-campaign/] Rosenstein cleared Clinton on both Whitewater and Uranium One. He still runs the FBI, albeit subject to Barr's supervision now. Barr might not care who wins the Democratic nomination. The FBI is already investigating Bernie for bank fraud.[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-and-jane-sanders-under-fbi-investigation-for-bank-fraud-hire-lawyers/] The 2016 election was the bureau's first foray into presidential politics since Watergate. They won't make so many mistakes this time around. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:22, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I think Peter is being ironic—[[Peter Strozk]] in 2016 was the very essence of a corrupt, non-accidental mishandler of a criminal case during the Hillary illegal e-mail server scandal. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 03:26, 22 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I meant that compared to Mark Felt, Strzok and McCabe were amateurs. Felt not only took Nixon down, but he kept his name out of the media until after he died. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 12:47, 22 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::There's definitely gonna be a shake-up at DOJ. Right now we're waiting on Horowitz's [[FISA abuse]] report. Meantime, Mueller is scheduled to testify to the Senate May 2 (don't know if it'll be public) which is mandatory, and the House invited him May 22. From what I see, Mueller would be crazy to testify in public.
+
::::::[[Andrew Weissmann]] wrote the report. Andrew Wiesmmann, the lead prosecutor, knew (a) the bogus evidence to start the investigation came from Hillary Clinton; (b) the bogus evidence was used to commit fraud against the [[FISA court]]; (c) the FBI continued to use [[Christopher Steele]] as a source (through [[Bruce Ohr]]) after the FBI fired Steele as an informant for breaking bureau rules; (d) collusion was a hoax; (e) the entire [[Mueller probe]] was a cover-up for FBI & DOJ illegal activity; (f) Mueller appointed Weissmann as lead prosecutor to aid in the cover-up. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:24, 22 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
Looks like it's over. Biden is the DNC establishment pick. In 1991 Biden referred to [[Bill Barr]] as "a heck of an honorable guy"[https://twitter.com/i/status/1120010352257847296] after Barr covered up Bush/Clinton collusion in the [[Iran-Contra_affair#Camp_Robinson_meeting|Iran/Contra]] scandal. A similar deal is needed now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:32, 23 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Hello Rob, how are you?  That helps, but its not quite what I mean. For example, Main Page‏‎ (41,928,459 views) may increase by 3000 or 300,000 over the next week or month. So the number may change to 42,228,459, but it won't tell you that it increased by a difference of 300,000. That would require taking out a calculator and having the old frame of reference. Maybe a screenshot or something.  You would have to actually know that the old number was 41,928,459 to begin with otherwise the month's metric of 300,000 is lost.  Well, not that I see anyways.  If I missed it, let me know. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 17:51, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
:A decade I would have conceded the power of the [[Dem]] Establishment. Not so sure today.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:13, 23 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Oh yes, you have a good point. Does Wikimedia have something that does that? I'm a regular reader of the Popular Pages page, but the only way to discover the ''rate'' at which a page is advancing is by copypasting the data somewhere (usually on the articles Talk page ) with a time stamp. That's quite cumbersome. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:16, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
::The Dem establishment now is going through with the Democratic Socialists what the RNC went through with the Tea Party a few years ago. They loosened Superdelagate control to give insurgent candidates a chance But Biden is the establishment pick, as Jeb and Hillary were. Harris, Klobuchar, Warren, even Beto are establishment candidates. Bernie is an insurgent. Buttigieg appears to be an establishment candidate, but he's young enough to flip and fight the establishment.  
+
::::::::::Yes, this is what they have. It is super easy to use and see that the total page hits for "Cat" is a little over 12 million.  In the menu over on the left click the Dates/calendar, then click "all time". Done. That simple. And two pages can also be compared. [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-20&pages=Cat]
  
::Beto is running for VP to make Texas competitive. It's highly unlikely the Dems will run two white males. A misstep by Biden could open the door for a female candidate to surge. But right now, Biden appears to have the establishment behind him. Can the Democratic Socialists finally take over the establishment, their main objective, this cycle? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 06:26, 24 April 2019 (EDT)
+
Another good example is [[Ocasio-Cortez]] has 29,000 views and was started in July 2018; [[Elizabeth Warren]] has 22,000 views and was started in 2010. This type of information is invaluable for the amount of time and attention an editor should give to a page. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:16, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:If we had site metrics, we could target higher traffic pages and bring them even higher to the surface.  As to the two pages you mentioned and in particular Elizabeth Warren, that's less than 3000 per year.  What this suggests(and we can't prove without metrics) is that nobody reads this page without first coming to the Conservapedia home page and browsing around. That page isn't "accidentally" being seen from outside on the interwebs. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 20:16, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Consider this scenario.  The page "Conservative Bible Project" caps the bottom of the most viewed pages.  But what if (for example) prior to one of these final debates the page for Jay Inslee starts surging over a few week period because some phrase in it is catching some search terms. If that page never eclipses 1.6+ million(which is easily a reality), it will never become known to us. The surge ends sometime shortly after the debate, it doesn't see new activity here by our contributors, so the end result is that the page never has the opportunity to move out of obscurity in the wider internet when it is surging.  We lose opportunities on a regular basis around here because of this blindness.  The opposite is also true about pages that drop off, considering some of the one-off editors that make their way through here. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 20:26, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Maybe we all need a tutorial: What it is, How does it work, and How do we get it? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:39, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Six years ago I wrote a computer program to enable me to take a snapshot of activity to see which entries were being visited most, without relying on intrusive [[Google]] software.  In response to the above I just updated and ran it.  Here are the top 20 entries visited this afternoon on Conservapedia:
 +
:::#Main_Page
 +
:::#Atheism
 +
:::#Clinton_body_count
 +
:::#Obamagate_timeline
 +
:::#Donald_Trump
 +
:::#Alger_Hiss
 +
:::#Katie_Hill
 +
:::#Bernie_Sanders
 +
:::#Barack_Hussein_Obama
 +
:::#Donald_Trump_achievements
 +
:::#Eddie_Rispone
 +
:::#United_States_presidential_election,_2020
 +
:::#Homosexuality
 +
:::#Russiagate_timeline_2017
 +
:::#Essay:Greatest_Conservative_Movies
 +
:::#Liberal
 +
:::#George_Soros
 +
:::#Muellergate_timeline_2019
 +
:::#Democratic_Party
 +
:::#Liberal_hypocrisy
 +
--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:32, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:It appears as if the Conservapedia [[atheism]] article is the second most popular page on the website. Please see: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3paAT8AO2Gk Viral article deals major blow to atheism] by [[PNN News and Ministry Network]].[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 00:17, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
===Biden's first ad===
+
==Site metrics, continued==
While the Sanders campaign emphasizes the freebies that he is going to give you, Biden's first ad is all about reviving old fake news.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-UU1_Je4_g] The ad is an extended discussion of Charlottesville, but neglects to mention that at the time Confederate statutes were considered to be the central issue. Tearing down statutes didn't poll well, so the left has revised history to emphasize the role of anti-Semitism. Trump is the most pro-Israel president in American history and he has Jewish grandchildren. Until Biden condemns Ilhan Omar, he's a fraud in the "more pro-Jewish than thou" sweepstakes. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:33, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
+
I would like to see this discussion continued. Andy indicated that he has some ability to put together scripts which can facilitate some of what is needed. I would like to know how far we can go. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 19:54, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:Biden's playing the [[race card]]. He hired Bernie's old press aide, an African American woman who donated to Buttigieg just a month ago. Biden needs to motivate Blacks to the polls in a way Hilary could not. The difference is, While Hillary wanted to toss Superpredators in jail, Biden wrote the law that did just that.
+
:I like your idea on Conservative media, as well (I think that discussion is now archived). Perhaps we can meld these two projects together. I have quite a bit of free time at the moment (awaiting the FISA abuse report which may take me away for sometime afterwards). But let's get both these projects started. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:49, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:The good news is, Biden sucks all the air out of the room and campaign donations while others tread water. In the long run, he gets beat in the primaries, if he makes it that far. Candace Owens is right, Blacks aren't stupid. Whoever emerges to beat Biden has to motivate Blacks to the polls better than Biden is trying. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:13, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::At the beginning of the ad, Biden waxes nostalgic about what race relations were like before Trump came along and ruined everything. Ah yes, the golden age of Obama/Biden when we had a president who wasn't afraid to egg on rioters in Ferguson and Baltimore and tour with Al Sharpton. Black Lives Matter encouraged police shootings in Dallas and elsewhere as Obama invited their leaders to the White House.[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 16:06, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::This article says it better than I did: "[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-running-on-the-medias-charlottesville-lie-about-trump Joe Biden is running on the media's Charlottesville lie about Trump]." Biden treats the unfortunate phrase "both sides" as a window into Trump's soul. A reporter at the press conference used this phrase in his question. Trump repeated it in his answer to show that he had heard the question and was responding it. Trump meant both sides of the Confederate statue question, but Biden interprets it mean both sides of the neo-Nazi question. It's a cautionary tale on Trump's willingness to comment on any subject in the news and respond to any question. There are two words he needs to add to his vocabulary: "No comment." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:42, 26 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Biden's a racist. We have more than enough evidence. I doubt he'll even make it to when the voting begins. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:03, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::When he was 29, Biden was eager to sell himself and his politics out to the highest bidder. But the bigwigs told him, "Come back when you're 40." Now that he is over 40, he's eagerly selling out. You can see the Biden's jaw dropping candor for yourself on [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soGNIATFDvs&t=746s this Jimmy Dore video]. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:52, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::The leftist rag ''Jacobin'' sums up Biden's life and career:
+
:::::::'' [https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/08/biden-crime-mass-incarceration-police-prisons "It’s not as if Biden didn’t know what he was doing.... He just didn’t care. Biden had made a calculated decision that the elections he would win were worth the damage he inflicted....  the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader], let alone a progressive one.''
+
::::::I doubt anyone can top that or add to it before we hear the last of Joe Biden. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 02:14, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::''N.B.'' "Carceral policies" means criminal sentencing or prison policies
+
  
====Contest: what will the G.O.P. cave on next?====
+
==Nada==
::::Coulter, Ann (May 13, 2015)
+
  
::::Sen. Ted Cruz—along with lickspittle Paul—wants to end mandatory minimum sentencing. Yes, remember how much we trust judges to use their discretion wisely? The precise reason the public demanded mandatory minimums in the first place was because so many liberal judges had their own ideas about "alternatives to prison"—such as, again, not prison.  
+
I have to admit I'm been fascinated by emotional dismissals.  But mostly for the humorous (or as the Commonwealth puts it, humourous) component.  Like maybe you blame a poor delivery of a joke you wrote for someone else the audience didn't understand for giving you "nothing" to work with—whether it really happened or not.  This hasn't actually happened to me, but it might have to you. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 06:20, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Happens all the time. That's why the search for a universal language (interesting, how the Spanish menu on my TV uses the word 'idioma' for 'language' rather than 'lingua' or 'tongue').
 +
:Trump knows this better than anyone cause his twitter jokes seem to go over the commie media's heads (you'd think they would understand the idioms, having grown up in the ''Saturday Night Live'' school of satire for decades). The guy is enormously hilarious; their constant taking offense is either deliberate ignorance and hypocrisy or symptoms of being plain brain dead. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:54, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee suggests that, instead of prison, the government should "address character."
+
== Who is the whistleblower? ==
  
::::Huckabee, for example, addressed the character of Maurice Clemmons—a career criminal who said he was deeply remorseful and was trying to be a good Christian—by granting him clemency. This allowed Maurice to rape a child and slaughter four police officers execution-style, in "the largest number of law enforcement officers killed by one man in a single incident in U.S. history," at least according to Wikipedia.
+
Washington's greatest secret revealed: "[https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html How 'Whistleblower' May Be Outed: Ties to Biden, Brennan, Schiff's Staff, Etc.]." His name is Eric Ciaramella (char-a-MEL-ah). He graduated from Yale and worked with Biden on Ukraine in 2015-2016. He was an NSC staffer in 2016-2017 and thus worked closely with Susan Rice, the unmasker in chief. There was a huge problem with leaks early in the Trump administration and Ciaramella was a suspect. So of course he was transferred to the CIA in mid-2017. They don't have any secrets worth keeping over there, apparently. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:29, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Don't forget the other big story - Republicans were blocked from asking Vindman yesterday, ''Did you have any contact with Ciaramella'' after the July 25 phone call? ''Did you have any contact with Schiff's staff?''
 +
:
 +
:Other question could have been, ''Did you leak Trump's early 2017 phone calls to the Mexican and Australian presidents?'', which are felonious national security leaks.
 +
:
 +
:Oh, and Susan Rice dumped all the blame on [[Samantha Power]], who unmasked over 300 names beginning in late 2015. John Bolton unmasked 2 while he was UN Ambassador. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:37, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Hey Peter, this "secret" was already revealed in [[#Golden Fleece Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2016 dinner guests]].  It turns out they all had a fancy dinner together before the election.
 +
:
 +
::And hey, why didn't we get a report of your role as a military ''attaché'' in Hong Hong on Talk:Main Page?  That is much more interesting than Schiff's two goons. What are we, chopped liver? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:35, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:
 +
::And RobS, lol! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:20, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::(On the bright side, releasing Maurice saved Arkansas taxpayers all sorts of money—just as [Gov. Rick] Perry predicted!)  
+
:::We're linking [[Ciaramella]] to [[Alexandra Chalupa]] right now (in real time), which is gonna blow thiexs thing wide open. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:32, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Although the conservative media is full of Ciaramella buzz at this point, no one in the mainstream media has even reported on the story. If it wasn't true, somebody would have debunked it by now. It seems that liberal journalists don't believe in reporting the news anymore, at least not news they don't like. I hope Barr makes an example out of this guy and sends him to prison for a good long time. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::If and when the minority in Congress ever win any participatory rights, and if the Democrats ever again respect constitutional due process and the rights of the accused, Matt Gaetz is gonna call Adam Schiff as his first witness: ''Did you collude with Eric Ciaramella?'' ''Did you collude with Vindman?'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 08:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::In fairness to me, Peter Ka is like the Elvis Presley of declassification, only matched by Donald Trump, whose declassification of the picture of the dog who apprehended Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi netted 568K likes. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Before sucking up to ''The New York Times'', it would be really great if Republicans would read, so they'd know stuff.
+
==Conservapedia Talk:Main Page recent wild success==
  
::::Contrary to the a**holery being pushed nonstop by the left, for example:
+
3.6% of the total visits to Talk:Main Page have occured in the last 29 days.
:::::(1) No one is in prison just for possessing a joint; and
+
:::::(2) So-called "non-violent" drug crimes that result in prison are generally committed by violent criminals.  
+
::::Evidently, Americans need to patiently explain to elected Republicans—who are too busy hanging out with their Chamber of Commerce friends to have any idea how the world works—that no judge is going to waste prison space on a guy selling a joint.  
+
  
::::According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 0.7 percent of all state inmates are behind bars for marijuana possession alone. Carnegie Mellon's Jonathan Caulkins puts the figure at less than half a percent.
+
Okay, that's it, I don't have any more information! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:43, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::And these are the convictions of record.
+
:So in CP's 144 month existence, that's about 500% above the average; I think the Deep State is spying on us to see what our priorities (and the style of rhetoric used) in preparation for the [[2020 presidential election]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:15, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Our pro-criminal media invariably cite the conviction of record, as if that's the worst crime committed by the defendant. But, as the ''Times'' itself reports: "97 percent of federal cases and 94 percent of state cases end in plea bargains."
+
::Spying?  Perhaps a better description would be "reading the pages that we put on our public web site".  The priorities and rhetorical style of the various contributors to this site are out there for all to see. Including all the "atheism and apricots" stuff.  I doubt that any of this will influence the 2020 election. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:18, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Do you think criminals are pleading guilty to the most serous offenses they're actually guilty of?
+
:::What are you talking about, we delivered the one-two knock out punch to [[Katie Hill]] ([[Equality Act]] & [[White Supremacy]]). We made her the poser child for both.  I've seen at least a dozen articles today of her supporters trying to pick up the pieces. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:48, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
:::::Defense attorney: The prosecutors want to charge you with murder one, menacing, drug possession and distribution.
+
:::::Criminal: OK, I'll plead to murder one.  
+
:::::Defense attorney: No! We'll offer to plead to possession of marijuana.  
+
:::::Criminal: Oh! OK, OK, I see—yes, you're right
+
::::Show me all the wonderful fellows in prison just because they had a single joint. I want three examples—and I want their names, so I can find out what they really did.
+
  
::::For years—in fact, to this very day—the left's poster boy for the monstrous injustice of the war on drugs was DeMarcus Sanders, whose life was ruined, so the legend goes, just because police found a single marijuana seed in his car.  
+
:@Rob: ''"So in CP's 144 month existence, that's about 500% above the average"'' I'm not so sure: The counter is reset whenever the page is destroyed and recreated - the current version was created on  June 5, 2014 by User:Conservative. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 19:18, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
::::And then you run a basic Google search and find out that DeMarcus was a known gang member who had already served time for shooting a rival gang member. After that conviction, DeMarcus was arrested again, for who knows what—but copped a plea to possession of marijuana, the only charge we ever hear about in connection with his name.  
+
::Don't spoil his fun, man. He's righteously LARPing for Trump, Jesus, and the American way. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:59, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Just a few months ago, DeMarcus was again sentenced to prison, this time after taking a plea to being "a prohibited person in possession of a firearm and ammunition," as the ''Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier'' (Iowa) reports. (Incidentally, I thought we all agreed that known felons shouldn't be allowed to have guns.)
+
== Hong Kong elections  ==
  
::::The reason so many plea bargains involve firearms and drugs isn't that those are the perp's main crime: It's because guns and drugs aren't human beings who can make lousy witnesses, leave the jurisdiction, die or be intimidated out of testifying. Possession offenses are the very least the prosecutor can demand in a plea bargain and the quickest way to get bad guys off the street.  
+
On VargasMilan's advice above, I will update the [[User:PeterKa#Back_from_Hong_Kong | report on Hong Kong that I wrote a couple of weeks ago]]. The election of the city's 18 district councils is not usually anything to get excited about. But my informants tell me that everyone plans to go to the polls in the next election, scheduled for November 24. In 2015, 55 percent of the vote went to pro-government parties while 40 percent went to the pro-democracy parties. How does that happen? In a low key election, a significant percentage of the vote consists of people who go to the polls simply because their bosses told them to go vote. Public opinion was evenly divided last time around. Since then opinion has shifted dramatically to the pro-democracy side. It's all rigged in the sense that the election judges can disqualify as many candidates as it takes to make sure the pro-government parties get a majority. Those judges are already hard at work, according to today's ''South China Morning Post'': "[https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3035481/blocking-joshua-wong-standing-election-hong-kong-just-driving By blocking Joshua Wong from standing for election, Hong Kong is just driving protesters back to the streets]."<br/>The government has made several concessions to the protestors recently. For example, it was reported that Carrie Lam, the city's hated chief executive, will step down by March. Lam's "local government" is just window dressing and power rests with the Communist Party, or "Liaison Office" as it is called in Hong Kong. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:19, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:As an administrative head, she's already a member of the Central Committee, I think. The next step up is the Politburo Standing Committee, as understand it. She can't fail, she can only be promoted out of a job. Time to bring in some fresh blood into a tough job. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:08, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::[http://www.xinhuanet.com//english/2017-10/24/c_136702936.htm Here is a list of current Central Committee members]. Lam is not on it. But notice that Wang Zhimin, head of the Liaison Office, is a full member of the Central Committee. Wang reports to Zhang Xiaoming, head of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office. Zhang is also a Central Committee member. None of these people are on the Politburo or the Secretariat, so they may not be all that high ranking in terms of the national party. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:02, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Then she must be up for a job on the Central Committee. Either way, she gets promoted. If there is violence and bloodshed, she gets promoted to some mainland position; if peace and order is maintained, she gets promoted. Their system is not unlike the US civil service system. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:56, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Lam's background is in the Hong Kong civil service, not the Communist Party. The Hong Kong Communist Party is an "underground" organization and its membership is secret. So there is no way of knowing if she is a member. But the party doesn't trust anyone who hasn't been trained from college as a party man. After Tung Chee-hwa was ousted as chief executive in 2005, he was appointed vice chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference. This is an advisory body whose chairman is on the Politburo Standing Committee. It is a place to park nonmembers of the party, the "fellow travelers" as Trotsky would put it. The conference has 25 vice chairmen, so there is even less to this honor than meets the eye.<br/>If you want to compare the Chinese system to the U.S. federal bureaucracy, you should know that a very high number of people are being purged in China all the time, including quite high-ranking people. This is true both in the army and in the party. The reason usually given is corruption. Since Xi Jinping himself is hugely corrupt, at least according to the Panama Papers, there is obviously more to the story than that. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:49, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::That's the [[Discipline Inspection Commission]]. i started some work on that many years ago either here or in Wikipedia but didn't get far. Didn't Carrie Lam attend some high level Summer camp meeting with mainland CCP bosses just a few months ago? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:02, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
*What do you know? Only Joshua Wong was disqualified as a district council candidate. So the election could end up being more or less democratic this time around. To review thousands of applications and disqualify only Wong suggests spite was a factor.[https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/11/01/hong-kong-election-candidates-survive-political-vetting-one-exception]<br/>Vetting for candidates was introduced in 2016. It was imposed retroactively in order to disqualify six sitting lawmakers, just enough to give the pro-government parties a majority in the legislature. These legislators fell afoul of a rule against advocating "self-determination." "Self-determination of peoples" is enshrined in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter. (President Woodrow Wilson made it part of international law. He was a big fan of the Confederacy.) [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:09, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Did you see any protestors take measures to avoid facial recognition?  If so, what were they? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 03:14, 3 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Well, they wear masks. Masks have been a symbol of the protests ever since they were banned. It's usually just a piece of cloth. The Guy Fawkes mask is popular as well. They had a masquerade in the Lan Kwai Fong nightclub district for Halloween and the police used tear gas.[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/12/hong-kong-protesters-defy-ban-masks-clashes-with-police] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:37, 4 November 2019 (EST)
  
::::Prosecutors know who the defendants are, and know what they really did. That's why those in prison for "mere" drug possession actually have a higher arrest rate for violent crimes than those in prison for burglary, robbery or even drug trafficking, according to innumerable studies, including one in the ''Journal of the American Statistical Association.''
+
===Side comments===
 +
Organization of the CCP is an important and fascinating topic, for two reasons (1) The immediate necessity of Americans to understand the Chinese system, and (2) to clarify and rectify many misunderstandings Americans have about historic totalitarian regimes, i.e. the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
  
::::You know what would be really great? Instead of Republicans impressing the media by taking "surprising" positions on crime, how about Republicans try surprising us by taking a position against Wall Street or the Chamber of Commerce and on the side of ordinary Americans?
+
In both the Soviet and Nazi single party systems, neither the Communist party nor the Nazi party fully controlled the military. The armed military in both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were the only potential internal threat the existence of [[single party control]]. It was for this reason that both the [[KGB]] and [[SS]] were created, to strong arm the military and protect the party.
  
::::True, it wouldn't be celebrated as a "kumbaya" moment by Bloomberg News. But on the plus side, a lot fewer Americans would be murdered, crippled, raped and robbed. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 19:26, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
By contrast, in the Chinese system, (and its progeny, such as Vietnam and Cuba), the party's center of power was formed around the military, and that is the one institution the party continues to dominate and control, and uses to intimate the traditional civil service. All this has yet to play out to its tragic finish as it did in both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. In the USSR and the Third Reich, there were elements in the Red Army and Wehrmacht that sympathized with the plight of common people living under a totalitarian system; in the Chinese system, its unclear how any kind of armed dissent could arise within the military - which is the same as the communist party in full totalitarian control. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
:::::Democrats control Wall Street, everyone knows that. The Chamber of Commerce is [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/11/03/follow-the-rubio-endorsements-follow-the-rubio-money-find-the-chamber-of-commerce-agenda/ a big player] in the [[Deep State]]/[[Uniparty]]. [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/08/31/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-admits-no-common-ground-with-trump-on-immigration-chamber-demands-open-ended-immigration-must-be-maintained-ion/ Opposing the] [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/10/10/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-president-tom-donohue-rages-president-trump-is-existential-threat-to-nafta/ Chamber of Commerce] [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/02/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-launches-yet-another-financial-campaign-against-u-s-workers-and-main-street/ globalist agenda] is [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/12/10/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-threatens-trump-usmca-deal-eliminate-steel-aluminum-tariffs-or-no-support-s/ what Trumpism is all about.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:07, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Unfortunately, we don't understand the party's internal structure very well. I have a book called ''The Party'' by Richard McGregor. So sources do exist. In Deng Xiaoping's time, the "Eight Elders" would meet each summer at Beidaihe and work out upcoming policy announcements for the Central Committee, Politburo, State Council, and so forth. Was this group a power center or just a collection of Deng's buddies? When the Elders started dying off, Deng lost his authority. So it is possible that they were the power behind the throne all along.<br/>Because the party boss was top dog in the Soviet system, many people assume the general secretary runs China like a dictator. In the 1950s, Deng was general secretary, but he was definitely not the top leader. According to the party's constitution, the Politburo sets party policy while the Secretariat implements it. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:49, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
::::::These are large corporations and a big group that favors lots of unskilled labor to be let into the country, in case your readers didn't see what was hidden in your links. Unfortunately, Trump has only built 26 miles of fence, so Trump seems to be unsure about what Trumpism is "all about". But that was really a side issue that Coulter briefly mentioned. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 21:04, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I don't want to give the impression I'm speaking with knowledge or authority, but rather just personal impressions' It's almost like there is a dual system: (1) A Politburo and a Politburo Standing Committee, then (2) a Party Congress and the Central Committee. The Politburo and Party Congress seem to be formalities and annual events where party policy is adopted, then the standing committees are year-round administrators. There is some minor or modest overlap in personal. The big question is, ''Where does the real power reside?'' Theoretically, the standing committees just implement and administer the policies of the Congress and Politburo, but it could also be the annual formal meetings are just honorary positions that rubber stamp policy decisions and directions adopted by the bureaucrats in the course of the previous year. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:03, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
:::::::It's the economy, stupid. The Democrats are the party of big business, the Republicans are the party of the common man (yes, transgenders are not common). Everone knows this, accept the [[fake news]] [[mainstream media]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:00, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::"It's the economy, stupid" was a slogan from twenty-five years ago among inside baseball U.S. Federal Government political strategists that made it into the public mainstream expressing the answer they came up with after they wondered which issues voters cared about the most.
+
::::::RobS sometimes makes these cryptic replies that nevertheless express a deeper understanding of politics than the rest of us. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:29, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::"The economy, stupid" was a slogan strategist James Carville put on a sign he mounted at the Clinton campaign headquarters in 1992. At that time, there were still a lot of voters who had experienced the Great Depression. They needed to be reassured that we were not sliding into another one. Based on the last few elections, you could say "It's the health care, stupid." We need to put the brakes on health care costs with medical savings accounts or some other market mechanism. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:27, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Thank you. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 00:50, 13 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==[[Cory Booker]] to the rescue==
+
:::I read the Congressional Research Service's ''[https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41007.pdf Understanding China’s Political System],'' (45 pages) which is what Members of Congress and people in the USG use. It's revised from time to time, but hasn't been revised in 6 years now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:20, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
  
"Cory, your illegal immigrant friend just pick-pocketed that laborer, disappeared into a gang, and they all walked off laughing! What's up with that?"
+
== Israel vs. Ukraine ==
  
Cory: [sits up, leans forward] "[angrily] Listen, America is a [clenches fist] strong [relaxes fist] country and a wealthy nation!"
+
It's useful to note that while Democrats are complaining about "quid pro quo" with Trump and Ukraine, they openly support the same policy with regard to Israel: [https://www.wsj.com/articles/democratic-candidates-debate-using-aid-to-israel-as-leverage-in-policy-disputes-11572519601] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Subtitle in your article: "Bernie Sanders says Israel would have to ‘fundamentally change’ its relationship to Gaza to receive aid if he is elected"
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 05:30, 21 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:A socialist who had a heart attack recently talking about what is going to happen to US/Israel policy if he is elected to be president of the United States. I think Bernie Sanders needs to create greater self-awareness within himself.  "A man has got to know his limitations" - Dirty Harry, Magnum Force[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uki4lrLzRaU][[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 10:11, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
==[[Horror of a unique position|The horror of a non-unique position]]==
+
::Point of fact: there was only ever a ''potential quid pro quo'' between the Ukraine and the Trump Administration.  And the phony (Congressional) "House Inquiry" testimony indeed bore out the Ukrainians ''never originated a new policy'' with regard to investigating government or business entities Trump called the president of Ukraine about or even the Bidens, who came later in the conversation. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 10:16, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"Man in critical condition after hearing slightly differing viewpoint" (April 11, 2019). ''Babylon Bee'' (h/t Mike S. Adams)[https://babylonbee.com/news/man-in-critical-condition-after-hearing-slightly-differing-viewpoint]
+
== Revival of pictures of New York City gaslights ==
  
GLENDALE, CA—A man was rushed to the hospital yesterday after encountering a slightly different viewpoint than his own Wednesday.
+
I forgot how pretty these looked!  I like all the funny names of the different brands. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 11:05, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
+
Shortly before 12:30 p.m., Glendale PD officers responded to a 911 call at the Java Lounge Coffee House in the 900 block of North Emerson Road. They found a person who had collapsed in shock and went to the station for help. Witnesses say the man was having a casual conversation about politics with another patron when the minutely opposing viewpoint was expressed.
+
  
"They were both Democrats, Bernie supporters," said Janice Hughson, a barista at the Java Lounge. "Then the guy he was talking to said he had some issues with abortion and thinks there should at least be a few limitations put on the practice. That's when the man seized up and began foaming at the mouth. It was terrible."
+
[[File:NYT Gaslighting 1970-2018.jpg|float right|625px]]
  
Four other bystanders were also emotionally injured by the moderately divergent opinion but were not hospitalized.
+
:Shame it just shows the frequency relative to the peak so you can't compare each word. It would be interesting if there was a similar graphic showing what percentage of articles contained that word at that time so you could get a better overall picture as well as some more non-woke words. Still fascinating though. [[User:FredericBernard|FredericBernard]] ([[User talk:FredericBernard|talk]])
 +
::Let me remark, I found this upload fascinating. I wish we could find a mainspace to put it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:19, 5 November 2019 (EST)
  
The man is being kept stable on ideology support at St. Francis medical center, surrounded by friends and family who agree with him 100% on every single issue.
+
== Idea for Main Page Right ==
  
The man who suggested the slightly differing opinion fled the scene. Anyone with information is asked to alert the authorities.
+
Today is Reformation Day, the 502nd anniversary of Martin Luther's theses on the church door at Wittenberg. The rest is, to use a cliché, history. We had a very interesting discussion about it today at our interfaith group!
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 03:08, 22 April 2019 (EDT)
+
It goes without saying that the mass media won't mention it. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 20:39, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
:I hope they had conservative anti-venom at the hospital. :)
+
  
:I forgot how much I love the Babylon Bee.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:01, 22 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==[[Christine Blasey Ford]] had nothing to gain by testifying==
::I was listening to a high performance coach and he said the reason why there are so many [[SJW]]s/snowflakes is because they lack confidence. Their ideology is one that weak excuse makers adopt.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:12, 25 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::I don't call them SJWs anymore but SPFs: Slacker Party Freaks. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 17:16, 25 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I like [[class warrior]]s. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:33, 25 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::::The hospital had better be careful. Chances are, the victim will tell his friends and family what upset him.  If they are in 100% agreement as this story says, the hospital is likely to have a whole room chock full of melting snowflakes. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 21:55, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
...except non-stop acclamations, awards and receptiveness to her political leadership from multitudes of spiteful liberals (that is, nearly all of them) from that point forward.<ref>Prestigiacomo, Amanda (November 1, 2019). [https://www.dailywire.com/news/christine-blasey-ford-wins-another-award-gives-acceptance-speech "Christine Blasey Ford wins another award, gives acceptance speech"]. Dailywire.com</ref>
::::::[https://babylonbee.com/news/to-show-respect-for-sri-lanka-victims-top-dems-vow-not-to-mention-their-religion-at-all This one's good], and it's right in line with what Denis Prager [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/04/23/why-obama-and-clinton-tweeted-about-easter-worshippers-not-christians/ wrote about here]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:08, 27 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:We should subpoena her tax returns and find out how profitable lying, fraud, and subversion is. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:21, 5 November 2019 (EST)
 +
====Reference====
 +
{{reflist}}
  
==Scientist claims speed of light (''c'') changing==
+
==Shaking my head==
  
She will test the theory, but, if it's true, how can the equation E=m''c''<sup>2</sup> be true?
+
Fox News reported a Finnish politician is under a 'hate crime investigation' for sharing a Bible verse on Facebook.
  
::You are repeating what you saw in the '''Daily Star'''???  Seriously?  She's going to test her new theory that the speed of light is changing?  And no one in the "legitimate" scientific community has picked up on this?  And she's going to "put an atomic clock in the International Space Station to 'verify' her theory"?  Are you aware that all experiments on spacecraft are well documented and well thought out?  Have you found the description of this experiment on the NASA web site? 
+
What a bigot. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 05:53, 7 November 2019 (EST)
::And she is using data from '''fossils''' as her source of wisdom?  And she thinks her discovery might lead to Star-Trek-style "warp speed"?  Have you checked her quantitative data on the observed change in the speed of light?  And seen where it fits into the graphs in the [[C decay]] article?  (Disclaimer: mostly written by "expert/shill" SamHB.)
+
::Have you checked her "proof" that a changing speed of light means that E=m''c''<sup>2</sup> can't be true?  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:45, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::The title of this section is the first ''bona fide'' troll I've ever placed on Conservapedia, and minutes ago I revisited the section to guiltily remove it.  The scientist in question didn't "admit" the speed of light is changing, she just said that she believes it to be true.  There is a non-standard sense of "admit" that means "allow as plausible" but it's contrary to common usage.  But the way your response captured you in perfect snobbishness makes me want to try to repeat it somehow now, in spite of myself. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 03:46, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::OK, I've changed it.  The usage struck me as odd when I first saw it.  The word "admit" has two common meanings:  confess to some kind of personal shortcoming (anything from having overstated one's case in a casual conversation to having committed murder), or "allow for the possibility of".  The second meaning is less common, but is clearly what you wanted.  To avoid misleading the reader, I've changed it to "claim".
+
  
If not, "expert/shill" SamHB is proven wrong, and "Best of the Public" Andy Schlafly is right!  It's too bad SamHB has always seemed to be a sycophant/toady to relativity scientists.  Because he may be about to slip on his own banana peels that he placed on the floor that would impress them.  That is to say, by making it harder for those who believe in the Genesis creation story to spread the gospel after seeing his poor soul desperately try to extract a contradiction where none exists.  And likewise assuming he has a sincere objection rather than him conveniently setting up an obstacle course where bible thinkers would waste time and upon which they would be at risk to slip on the nearby peels and fall down. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 17:37, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
== Is Warren taking a dive? ==
:[https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/775350/Time-travel-proof-NASA-insider-possible-speed-of-light-changing-video NASA scientist claims time travel is POSSIBLE because ‘speed of light is changing’].
+
:[[Barry Setterfield]] vindicated? :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:21, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
::Vargas, your writing style has almost always left me utterly baffled.  I can't figure out what you are trying to say. It makes me wonder whather you are simply trying to outdo your [https://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/134#The_Blood_Moon "withering patrician disdain"] comment and ascend to new heights of making no sense. Banana peels?  What?  And I don't try to make "bible thinkers [...] waste time and be at risk to slip on the nearby peels".  I don't consider "bible thinkers", or any other specific group, to be my main audience. I'm not trying to make anyone slip on any metaphorical banana peels. And being called an "expert/shill", by you, doesn't bother me. I'm puzzled at being called a "sycophant/toady" toward essentially every high school or college physics textbook written since 1950 or so. I don't see how one can be a "toady" toward a book. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:51, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
After briefly acheiving frontrunner status, Warren's poll numbers dropped dramatically when she proved unable to explain how she will pay for her signature "Medicare for All" proposal. She has also adopted a curious strategy of not responding to criticism. See "[https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/08/elizabeth-warren-campaign-067768 Elizabeth Warren blows up the 'war room']." Obama's people wanted Warren to run against Hillary in 2016. Obama aide Valerie Jarrett leaked the story of Hillary's "homebrew" email server to give her a helping hand. (This is a bit of history the mainstream media has been doing its best to erase lately.)<br/>Warren was apparently afraid of challenging Hillary in 2016. When you think about what happened to Brett Kavanaugh, Don Imus, or others who've crossed the Clintons, she was probably playing it safe. Who thought you could still red bait a Democratic congresswoman like Tulsi Gabbard? It's so old school. Warren can position herself so she can pick up the pieces when Hillary finally realizes that her campaigning days are over.<br/>Or at least that's the way I hope things work out. America has been on the Clintons' enemies list since the 2000 election. Hillary will be in quite a vindictive mood by the time inaugeration rolls around. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:05, 9 November 2019 (EST)
:::Yet, you have repeated the phrase "withering patrician disdain" on nine? different occasions, even ''after'' I explained I had only copied the phrase rather than had custom-designed it to describe your introduction of a set of ideas you had formed about the moon. Don't you remember?  You seemed disappointed that I had copied it from one of Conservative's quotations and dismissed it as his type of "garbage"!  Please SamHB—end it. The person the phrase was being used for was being a bit pedantic, and then I saw ''you'' being a bit pedantic.  The overly-precise description didn't even fit the style of argument of the person it was originally aimed at very well, much less yours. It goes no deeper than that. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 03:31, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:Michelle Obama is the only one who could reassemble Democratic voters - minus non-aligned and crossovers. Warren can't get blacks onboard, and looks increasingly like she never will if she can't do it right now in the next 3 months. Warren's other problem is Wall Street, which pledged $70 million to fund the DNC convention but now has second thoughts. Hillary wants to run so bad, but she can't win a two-way contest (her 2 Senate wins were virtually unopposed in the general election), never mind a wide field. Dick Morris, no amateur, lays out  a scenario where Warren becomes inevitable. And it's like watching a slow train wreck. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:42, 10 November 2019 (EST)
::::OK, I admit I've overused that phrase.  I won't use it anymore.  There are others, like "[https://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Parrot#No_Credit_Where_Credit_is_Not_Due SamHB embraces the pseudoscience that leavens science too tightly to be trusted]" and "[https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=1110822&oldid=1110821 He (SamHB) seems to have no suspicion that any of those he despises could find his stilted pose of indignant rationality merely laughable....  Transfixed in wonderment at the workings of his own mind]".
+
::I hope Bloomberg is testing the waters just out of vanity. Blacks hate him for being pro-police while progressives hate him for being fiscally responsible. That leaves him competing with Gabbard for the white moderate vote. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:31, 10 November 2019 (EST)
::::Perhaps you could do with a little less florid prose about me personally, and be willing to discuss relativity in a sensible manner, one that doesn't set off my "sycophant/toady" alarm.  You seem to read books and stuff, and that's good.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:51, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::He's picking up the anti-gun torch from Beto. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:10, 10 November 2019 (EST)
:::::Those last two phrases belonged the ''same'' long quotation of what someone else said that contained the "withering patrician disdain" phrase. You can't count that quotation three times! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:10, 13 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
::You should vape that. The ambiguity of my claims would quickly reduce SamHB to apoplexy as would his being called a sycophant/toady.  How did you figure it out? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 18:32, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
== Ciaramella vs. Plame ==
::::Don't bother vaping it.  I would just put it back.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:45, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Via a couple of search engine queries.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:37, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==History is the new intellectual battlefield==
+
Throughout the Valerie Plame episode, we were free to say the woman’s name all we liked. It was never established whether she was an undercover agent or not. But her status at the CIA, whatever it was, was treated as blown as soon as Robert Novak’s article was published.<br/>Not so with Eric Ciaramella, or “whistleblower,” as the media lovingly refers to him. Although his name is all over the conservative media, it’s out of bounds as far as our mainstream gatekeepers are concerned. See “[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/facebook-scrubbing-any-and-all-mentions-of-alleged-whistleblowers-name-from-the-platform Facebook scrubbing 'any and all mentions' of alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella].” If there is any precedent for keeping a “secret” this way, I am not aware of it.<br/>The logic for keeping a whistleblower’s name secret is to prevent retaliation at his place of employment. But Ciaramella’s various supervisors presumably know all about him. Are we supposed to imagine that after talking to Adam Schiff on Capital Hill, Ciaramella goes back to Langley, puts in a day’s work as an analyst, and his coworkers are none the wiser?<br/>So why can’t the media tell us anything about the man at the center of the hottest controversy in American politics? Well, if we knew who he was, we could examine his track record and determine if he is a credible source. The smart money says this is another production by the Steele dossier crew. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:24, 10 November 2019 (EST)
Just wanted to ask, what are we doing to defend history?  More importantly, to advance it and restore it? Anybody have ideas? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 19:36, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:See [[Lawfare group]] -- the same guys who wrote Ciaramella complaint are prosecuting the case. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:12, 10 November 2019 (EST)
:Your question is ambiguous; are you referring to defending historical values and traditions, or defending old, sometimes discredited historical. narratives? Each generation has to discover history for itself. For example, in 2003 the United States went to war to build [[nation state]]s in Iraq amd Afghanistan, i.e. instill a sense of "nationalism" in what we called "Iraqis" and "Afghanis," whose primary loyalties were to tribes and/or religion. Today, "nationalism" is a dirty word, loyalty to a religion (e.g. Satanism, Islam, etc.) is okay so long as it's not Christianity, and tribal identity politics are sacred. So what exactly do you mean by "defend history"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:51, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::To the extent that the media has tried to justify not disclosing the alleged whistleblower's name, they point to death threats. The way they present the issue of threats is thoroughly dishonest. You don't have to be terribly famous to get death threats. I speak from personal experience here. Furthermore, the media is interested in them only to the extent that they serve an agenda. Anomynity for whistleblowers was not created in order to prevent death threats. If potential threats are the standard, you could justify anomynity for almost anyone. What about people listed in Trump's tax returns? There have been boycotts of businesses just for having links to Trump. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:31, 10 November 2019 (EST)
::I left it ambiguous on purpose to get some thoughts, but my point is that if "each generation has to discover history for itself", how can we change this problem and overcome it, or in the least minimize it?  Hopefully to reverse it. Our enemies aren't sitting back waiting for "each generation to discover history for itself". [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 20:21, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::It makes no sense. How can he get death threats if he's not been named? Today [http://themillenniumreport.com/2019/10/whistleblower-ided-ciaramella-eric-ciaramella/ I found this (published a month ago], October 11, 2019) scroll down to see the context:
:::Education. Strip out the [[cultural Marxism]], and teach history as a search for economic improvements. Sure, Columbus discovered America to enslave Blacks, exterminate Indians, and rape the planet, and Ford invented the automobile to produce carbon emissions and kill us all, but had Europeans remained at home in Europe they probably wouldn't be overrun by Islam right now, and if Ford didn't invent the automobile, we wouldn't be living suburbs and driving to work. Economic improvements bring trade-offs, not perfect solutions. When artificial intelligence takes over, we won't need people anymore. And without people, we won't need artificial intelligence to determine when to launch a nuke. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:32, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::''"Adam Schiff claimed the whistleblower had received ‘death threats’ without saying '''when''' the alleged threats were received. Perhaps he forgot the whistleblower was anonymous; if so, how could they have been threatened?"'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:51, 10 November 2019 (EST)
:::Another good example is U.S. Defense spending. In the old days of the Cold War, we gave weapons to whoever shared our values of peace, love, freedom, democracy,etc.. Since the Clinton administration and Clinton Foundation, we sell weapons to whoever is willing to pay bribes to corrupt politicians. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:58, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I didn't realize that Fox News was also protecting this guy: "[https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-contributor-mollie-hemingway-causes-scene-when-she-names-alleged-whistleblower-on-air?ref=scroll Fox News Contributor Causes Scene When She Names Alleged Whistleblower on Air]." Hey, don't say "Ciaramella" or your mother will faint, and your father will fall in a bucket of paint. We need a blimp to go around the country with the message, "Eric Ciaramella is a fraud." Wasn't there a character in Harry Potter whose name you couldn't mention? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:13, 10 November 2019 (EST)
::::This will come across contentious and for that I apologize, but those all sound like policy ideas.  In other words, those are "something someone else can do" kinds of things.  I was thinking a little closer to home. What can we do.  Not what can they do.  The idea that I came up with, and this was some time ago, was that of recording audiobooks and bringing things that progressives don't want to be seen back into the disinfecting sunlight.  Is it a requirement conservatives must either be running some sort of blog/vlog, on talk radio or on TV?
+
::::::Watch [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K5dmP4ph3A a few minutes of] this [[Tim Pool]] report. Facebook suspended him for mentioning Ciaramella.  It's his first suspension ever anywhere. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:05, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::What about Sean Misko, the second whistle-blower?  We need to run a test on him, especially since he's an embarrassing wrinkle whom Adam Schiff wants to prevent from testifying altogether! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 04:53, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::Misko is a Schiff staffers, isn't he? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:34, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::I think he knew two of Schiff's staff members and was recruited by Schiff in August 2019.
 +
:::Lol, just found out that Ciaramella's name was already mentioned in the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence October 22, 2019 transcripts, published on November 6! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 10:07, 11 November 2019 (EST)
  
::::No, it is not.  Non-commercial open source/public domain audiobooks are a valid form of conservative media.  It's been neglected for far too long to be honest. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 23:07, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
FLASHBACK October 10, 2019
::::There was a French philosopher who once said that it doesn't matter what kind of history students learn, so long as they all learn the same thing. I think there is a lot of truth to that. The left is constantly changing what kind of history gets taught, undermining the point of the subject. "Hey hey, ho ho. Western Civ has got to go," as Jesse Jackson put it. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:42, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::Whistle-blower's attorney worked previously as probable soft coup ringleader James Clapper's attorney
 +
::Not only that, but s/he worked for an unnamed 2020 U.S presidential candidate's campaign.
  
== Biden the tongue tied ==
+
::Not only that, but Intelligence Committee member, allegedly intelligent, Adam Schiff remarked that s/he was receiving death threats. But how is that possible if s/he is anonymous? VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 01:45, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Is Biden ready for eight more years in public office? Not if this amazing video is any indication: "[https://news.grabien.com/story-old-man-joe-biden-slurs-his-way-through-first-speech-preside Old Man Joe: Biden Slurs his way through First Speech as Presidential Candidate]." Hey Sanders! It looks like the Democratic Party is all yours. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:05, 29 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::We'll have the answer to that in 2 or 3 years when nobody cares and she's forgotten. This is how Washington works.RobS De Plorabus Unum 06:43, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
:Trump sounds like English is his second language. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 03:18, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::Did you see the video? Biden's problem is clearly worse than Trump's. The media has been telling us for years that Trump's brain is barely functional. What does that say about Biden? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:39, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Excredible. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:22, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Hey I don't like Biden either but at least most of what he says is understandable. Trump seems to only know a few words - terrific, beautiful, big, Obama, wall and 'big league'. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 15:43, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Trump is actually extremely understandable/good at communicating with voters -- he connects with voters in a way that career politicians like Biden don't, and that's something that even his critics (the ones beside Jennifer Rubin and Max Booth!) admit. Watch a Trump rally and see for yourself. But Cons is right -- it's public policy that matters, and Trump is spot-on in that regard (see [[Donald Trump achievements]]). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:51, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
I don't care how understandable Biden is. What he advocates is wrongheaded. He was for the weak trade deals which shipped jobs overseas. He was for the Iraq War. He was for the stimulus plan boondoggle which failed. He is for cap and trade. He is for student loan forgiveness, etc. etc. Biden's presidency would be a drag on the USA economy.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:25, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Trump's rallies are going to be bigger than Biden's.  Trump wouldn't have big rallies if he wasn't a good communicator. And Trump strives to keep his promises. The reason many people ignore politicians is that they don't keep their empty promises.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:28, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Slacker Party Freaks ==
+
:::::My take: Hiding the (phony) whistle-blower's name is the (phony) media's way of helping the Democrats have more flexibility in ''staging'' or ''choreographing'' the impeachment drama, to compensate for the fact that there is no ''actual'' drama to the substance of what is left to disclose, in this case releasing the (phony) whistle-blower's name and face in a dramatic "reveal", even though, of course, the transcript was released weeks ago, and his testimony is completely unnecessary. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 16:05, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Coupled with the ongoing Facebook and Youtube censorship, you see how this is also a trial run for how Facebook and Google will handle the Democrats 2020 [[October Surprise]]. This impeachment coup has already been three years in the planning phase. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:49, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::I don't think they planned it this way. When his existance was first announced, Schiff thought Ciaramella would be a great witness. Then something happened that made them think better of that idea. The obvious move for Republicans in the Senate is to call Ciaramella as a witness. I assume he will refuse to testify. I hope the Senate issues a subpoena and puts him in jail. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:04, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::Theconsewrvativetreehouse back in December 2018 (before the new Congress was sworn in) outlined House Rules changes, as well as personnel, that were all geared toward impeachment. Among these changes was stripping the minority of any rights in hearings and depositions; striping the minority of the right to be notified that person was being summoned for a deposition; the sharing of information between committee chairs gathered by different committee subpoenas and hearings; the appointment of various Lawfare group attorneys in certain committees, etc. [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/28/pelosis-house-rule-changes-are-key-part-of-articles-of-impeachment-being-drafted-over-next-two-weeks/ Here's a September 2019 recap of the earlier article]. The two week timetable here was delayed, but even McConnell told Senators a few weeks ago to be prepared for a Senate trial before Thanksgiving. The public not catching on and lack of bipartisan support is basically the cause of the delay (so the MSM will continue hammering). The timetable is still before primary season begins (voting on February 3, 2020) cause at least four Senators will be on the road campaigning then.
 +
::::::::The December 2018 articles I could retrieve, but that would take time. Usually Sundance of theconservativetreehouse (who sounds an awfully lot like the team of diGenova and Toensing) will link back to an earlier article or cut an paste into an expanded update. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:45, 11 November 2019 (EST)
  
This is my new name for SJWs.  There are many like it, but this one is mine.  I don't think Hillary is a SJW or SPF, but to attract them, it benefits her to act like one.
+
::::::::[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/01/02/speaker-nancy-pelosi-outlines-new-rules-for-116th-congressional-session-includes-schedule-for-process-of-trump-impeachment/ Speaker Nancy Pelosi Outlines New Rules for 116th Congressional Session – Includes Schedule for Process of Trump Impeachment…] - Posted on January 2, 2019 by sundance
  
[[Scott Lively]] studied the juggling of terminology and categories with regard to homosexual activists, and he came up with a great insight, almost as good as ShockofGod's question for atheists.  After hearing some speech or some person described as "homophobic" by a homosexual activist and self-appointed mental health expert, he encouraged his internet audience to try and ask these activists, "what are some of the non-homophobic arguments or persons opposed to the practice and sanctioning of homosexuality?"
+
== Daily Beast article ==
  
This line of thinking can also be applied to Hillary's response to the New Zealand atrocity.
+
If you read the article, you'll see the Daily Beast exposes nothing.  It reports what is coming up in a TV show.
  
:She wrote: "My heart breaks for New Zealand & the global Muslim community. We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms."
+
The Anthony Blunt story was explained in great detail back in the 1980s by Chapman Pincher and others. He was protected by the British Secret Service from the early 60s to avoid any further damage to US-UK relations which had already been strained by the Philby affair.
  
:White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.
+
If you don't know about the Cambridge Spy Ring, this might seem like a revelation.  However, it was extensively covered by the MSM back then and it's in a TV show produced by the MSM now....so why is it on MPR?  Come on guys, you can do better.  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 11:56, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Great example! Initially, it was the "The Cambridge 2". Then a hunt for "The Third Man". Then eventually "The Cambridge 3", which lasted for about 2 decades.  By the 1970s the hunt was on for "The Fourth Man", and people were tired of it. They now have settled on "Cambridge 5" (Wikipedia's title). Great example of confusing historigraphy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:09, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::Despite the fact that real life British intelligence was thoroughly infiltrated like this, the James Bond movies allowed the phrase "British intelligence" to retain quite a cachet. To reiterate what others have already posted, the Cambridge spy ring is a very old story at this point. You could cover the show as news, but what would that headline look like: "Netflix has produced a show about an old British spy scandal."  [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:04, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::In reply to Rafael above, what the ''Daily Beast'' reports appears to be missing from the Wikipedia entry about the [[Cambridge Five]].  Why am I not surprised?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 21:43, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::The fifth man, John Cairncross, was exposed in the 1980s. Like the other four, his duplicity and trwason was known decades earlier.  Again, there's nothing here that is either a) recent news or b) hasn't been extensively covered by the MSM in the past. I simply fail to see how a web article about a TV show produced by the MSM about something that has already been extensively covered merits MPR status. The British elections are far more interesting!  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 16:59, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::So Lord Rothschild was the 6th Man? [https://espionagehistoryarchive.com/2018/03/27/victor-rothschild-soviet-spy/] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:35, 11 November 2019 (EST)
  
Clinton used to sign her tweets in an initialized form when she actually wrote them rather than her staff, but that notice no longer appears on her Twitter page, so the authorship status of her tweets is not now clear.
+
==MPL Update: 750,000,000 page views==
 +
[https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Statistics Need an update.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:57, 11 November 2019 (EST)
  
You may notice first that the tweet isn't even grammatically correct.  "fight the (A and B) of (C and D) in all ITS forms."
+
==Falsifiability==
  
"...Fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia..." Yes, now ''Secretary Clinton'' is a self-proclaimed mental health expert who can diagnose phobias, which in reality are well-defined syndromes, but just think how helpful she could have been through the ages had she applied her unique talents to contemporary political discourse:
+
Is sexism worse than it was before?  Is racism?  Do the misdeeds and weaknesses we are encouraged to avoid in the Bible through obedience to our faith misrepresent what is right and wrong?
  
:"King Louis XVI needs to put a stop to his Republica-phobic failure to enthusiastically embrace the beheading element of his nation's new Revolutionary regime..."
+
Unless affirmations of these beliefs, and those like them, include conditions under which they can be falsified, it's impossible for them to have any independent validity. Because then they could be the product of merely emotional leaps (in this case, as often, perhaps to be used as fig leaves or vehicles for revenge) without connection to reality, having gone unexamined.
  
:"The American colonists need to drop their objections to taxation without representation and own up to their Britainophobic prejudices against Tyranny."
+
These, otherwise, political pseudo-principles do harm, and are in a sense violence, in that when they are promoted, they distort the thinking of free citizens in their pursuit of what is the best interests of themselves and their country. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 05:35, 12 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Sexism is [[social construct]]. I witnessed it happen. It happened when [[white privilege]]d [[feminist]]s hijacked the [[civil rights movement]]. White privileged feminists do not want equality with blacks. They want power. That's what the "glass ceiling" is all about. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:36, 12 November 2019 (EST)
  
Like the examples, Secretary Clinton isn't on point to consider any non-Islamophobic opposition to Islam; in fact, she isn't even on point to consider any non-Islamophobic ''fear'' of Islam.
+
::I thought American liberals gave up Marxism after Solzhenitsyn's book as their project and made it women's liberation.  At least one administrator here(!) bore the brunt of opposing what really became a liberation to abuse and be abused by divorce and devaluation of family life.
  
So when the expected happens, Islamists escalating the violence of the atrocity with their own atrocities against innocent Sri Lankan Christians, innocent unlike the ChristChurch mosque community discovered to have had ties to terrorism<ref group=note>"The parents of a man killed by a drone in Yemen say he was 'radicalised' in ChristChurch.  But preachers at the city mosque say they are moderates.
+
::Is it wrong for me to suggest that black immigrants reached the point of hijacking the civil rights movement too as they have reached parity with American descendants of slaves in affirmative action programs?
:
+
"ChristChurch's Muslim leaders say they are shocked and 'disturbed' by claims two men killed in a drone strike in Yemen were introduced to radical Islam at their mosque.
+
:
+
"Australian Christopher Havard, 27, and dual New Zealand - Australian national Daryl Jones were killed by a missile fired by a US drone in November...
+
:
+
"Havard's mother and stepfather, Bronwen and Neill Dowrick, said their son joined the local mosque [Al Noor mosque in Addington, ChristChurch] and told them that was where he first encountered radical Islam.
+
:
+
"When he moved into the mosque he realised what they were trying to convert people to. That's when he left and went to Dunedin. He didn't agree with what they were teaching," they said...
+
:
+
"Dr Mohammad Alayan, a former senior member of the Christchurch Mosque, said claims of radical Islam in Christchurch were 'not true'.
+
:
+
"The mosque in Christchurch is very against that. Islam is all about peace."
+
:
+
Mathewson, Nicole (June 5, 2014). [http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/10120347/Drone-victims-radicalised-at-mosque "Drone victims 'radicalised' at mosque".] www.stuff.co.nz website.
+
:
+
Dr Alayan didn't seem to realize pleas that Islam "is all about peace" was, even then, the most well-known and cliché response—to those with any familiarity with the U.S. media—of suspiciously-acting Islamic authorities to charges of Islamic violence or radicalism.</ref>, Secretary Clinton leaves out the unforced conclusion that it ''is'' an expected response:
+
  
:On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I'm praying for everyone affected by today's horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.
+
::Women's liberation kept the "sexist" label in reserve, then their successors later used it wherever they could, then instead of just applying it to events and people, they to this day apply the allegation to abstract structures of American life, where suddenly a hidden vein of sexism will have been discovered to have escaped (at best, aided by the research of an agency helped by further allegations of their having a non-political or neutral nature) coincidentally during phases of political processes where there is no leisure to study the evidence. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 09:46, 13 November 2019 (EST)
  
But Secretary Clinton?  Didn't you just days ago call the fear, namely of the expectation of more Islamic violence, this very day taking the form of just such escalated, retaliatory violence, a ''mental disease''?
+
:::No no no, Solzhenitsyn is an anti-semitic bigot for criticizing communism, haven't you heard? (that's why the Nobel Committee gives awards for climate hoaxers, trying to rehab their reputation with leftists). Women's lib originated as a CIA plot 1957 when the CIA put [[Gloria Steinem]] on the payroll. The theory was that the Cambridge 5 got recruited in college so young people needed an alternative to Marxism to be recruited into, dedicate their lives to, and change the world (since Jesus and the church obviously were failing).
  
It's worse than you imagined: Not only is the opposition to Islam non-phobic (reality based), but even if it is phobic, ''it's completely understandable on the basis of this day's Islamic action!'' It's not a perpetuation or normalization of a phobia, it's a perpetuation or normalization of violent action! Don't you think you owe those prescient enough to expect future Islamic violence at that time an apology today for calling them phobics?
+
:::NYT reported the other day 40% of all Ivy League freshmen are immigrants or second generation immigrants; it's probably just a plan to [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PRZiFzonUo push wepawations] and encourage immigrants to get professional positions to keep ADOS on the [[Democratic plantation]].
  
But she ''can't'' reconcile her diagnosis of Islam's opponents as phobic with Islam's terroristic behavior, by definition fear-inspiring, especially in the context of politicians like her ignoring or refusing to do anything about the problem.  She needs to be seen as an unapologetic ''slacker''.  So she won't bother.  She thinks understandable fear of Islam, phobic or not, is more dangerous than a pattern of murderous attacks, a pattern outscaling white supremacist terrorism, that she doesn't refuse to call out, by a factor of hundreds.  She won't change because she needs to be seen as a politically fixed-prejudiced ''freak''. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 02:52, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::In the late 1960s and early 70s, honestly, when women started tossing around the word "sexism", as blacks benefited from affirmative action, housing discrimination laws, and handouts, most people just laughed when they heard or where accused of it. Which of course only became evidence that it was true and existed, as Hollywood, legislators and immigrant foreign rock stars picked up the torch ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5RuCEhHcG4 Woman Is The Nigger Of The World]). As blacks achieved civil rights, the Vietnam war wound down, and Nixon was driven from office, the liberal left needed new causes to keep violent mobs in the street motivated and bound together. Feminism and environmentalism became the issues. Now that women have achieved "progress" (a few dozen Congressional seats, a majority of college degrees, and zero-population growth) environmentalism or climate change comes to the forefront (oh, the gay rights movement hijacked the civil rights movement from blacks and feminists in the 1990s; the trannies' time has now come but with zero population growth and immigration, nobody really cares cause it doesn't really matter in the long run). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:28, 13 November 2019 (EST)
:My estimation, Hillary has a fan base of radical feminist women over 50 who vote Democrat, less than 8% of the population at best. The rest are MSM journalists and a few under 50 feminists or loyal liberals just humoring her. Meanwhile, the vast majority of Millennials, Blacks, and Republicans have either lost patience with her or hate her guts. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 03:07, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::Secretary Clinton is patient zero of my self-defined SPF syndrome, but just a carrier, that is, and not among the infected. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 03:32, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Why Hillary Clinton is hated by her former friends/allies. After General Robert E. Lee lost the Battle of Gettysburg, he said, "It's all my fault". Hillary is such a narcissist she essentially said, "It was mostly other people's fault". In short, excuseitus and blaming other people. She isn't a great leader. Great leaders take responsibility.
+
  
:::At its heart, SJWism is an excuse for underachievement. Hillary's vain excuse making partly involved SJWism (America wasn't willing to elect a woman she said), but it was mostly a reflection of liberal, baby boomer narcissism.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:31, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
==The plan...==
::::Hillary Clinton also suffered from complacency and a feeling of entitlement. Donald Trump outworked her and outsmarted her.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:43, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
The plan is to dump Trump by February, install [[Nikki Haley]] as Pence's running mate (that's what her pro-MAGA book tour is all about) and Hillary jump back into the race. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:36, 12 November 2019 (EST)
When will the SJW fad end?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:54, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Hillary jumping in is just her plan, I assume. If other top tier Democrats thought it was a good idea, she would have done it by now. Doesn't Pence get to pick his running mate? I don't think Hillary and Pence have joined up, at least not yet. Blacks despise Buttigieg and Bloomberg as pro-police. They don't respond to Warren. So I am looking at Sanders at this point. Hillary has a plan to stop Sanders, I'm sure. He went to Moscow for his honeymoon and would presumably be easier to red bait than Gabbard. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:34, 13 November 2019 (EST)
:Hillary Clinton is a homosexual. The gay rights movement became a federal issue during the Clinton administration, when the Clinton's married the gay pride movement to the Black civil rights movement. The monster she created bite her in the butt when a gay couple, the Obama's, stole her birthright and nomination from her in 2008. Now it's passed to the second generation of gay activists who want to be the second gay couple to occupy the White House. Hillary's all about ego now. She doesn't know when to quit while she's ahead, and feels she's been cheated. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:08, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::I thought filing deadlines were coming soon for Iowa and New Hampshire?  Or was this a joke? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 09:48, 13 November 2019 (EST)
::(You yourself just married "doesn't know when to quit" to "quit while she's ahead".  Very smooth way to echo your point with a motif, sir—very smooth way. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 17:10, 30 April 2019 (EDT))
+
:::This go-round (2020) will be a real test of Iowa and New Hampshire; Biden's strength is South Carolina (where blacks are 60% of Democrats) If Biden runs 4th or 5th in Iowa or New Hampshire, the MSM may use it to dispose of him before South Carolina (that's why [[Deval Patrick]] is being pushed now). One theory since the election of Obama is that blacks are more important than Iowa or New Hampshire, and that identity politics is more important than geographic or regional factors. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:56, 13 November 2019 (EST)
<br>
+
----
+
{{reflist1904|group=note}}
+
  
== Jews and U.S. politics ==
+
==Hearings==
 +
What a farce. (A) The sanctity of NATO: Ukraine ''is not'' a member of NATO; Turkey, a member of NATO, just purchased a Russian missile defense system (presumably to defend against NATO missiles). NATO is dead. (B) Biden ''is not'' the Democratic nominee. Biden ''is not'' Trump's political opponent in a campaign. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:51, 13 November 2019 (EST)
  
Trump is the most pro-Israel president in U.S. history. Meanwhile, the Dems proudly proclaim their support for the openly anti-Semitic Ilhan Omar. Yet U.S. Jews remain as Democrat as ever. Here is the ''Jerusalem Post'': "[https://www.jpost.com/US-Elections/US-Jews-contribute-half-of-all-donations-to-the-Democratic-party-468774 US Jews contribute half of all donations to the Democratic Party]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:11, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:The [[Treaty of Brest-Litovsk]] awarded the Ukraine to Germany in 1917; Hitler invaded Russia with the idea to make the [http://www.changingthetimes.net/samples/ww2/more_dangerous_hitler5.htm Crimea the "German Riviera"]. Now, after two world wars and 100 years, do you think Putin and the Russians will sit still for EU and Democrats to make the dream of Hitler and the Kaiser come true? Turn Sevastopol into a NATO naval base? Absolutely ludicrous. And We Americans will cede our Constitution, our Constitutional rights, and impeach a president to do so? Absolute insanity these Democrats, globalist/socialist and Trump haters have been overcome with. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:44, 13 November 2019 (EST)
  
:Even after Trump hired a Jewish lawyer. I made an appointment with a Jewish firm, and when I arrived a lawyer walked up to me and said "Andrew D. Goldstein, former U.S. district court prosecutor, attorney-at-law!"  As I clasped his hand I recognized him from Mueller's prosecution team and began to scream.  He just clenched my hand tighter and gave me a wicked smile.  Then mercifully, I suddenly started straight up and awoke in a cold sweat. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 19:51, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Cool story, Rob. While I'm here, what you want for Christmas? The [https://putin-calendar.ru/2020-calendars/wall-calendar-2/ Putin 2020 calendar] or the [https://www.amazon.com/Weby-Putin-Medvede-Bear-Decorative/dp/B0133GF138 Putin on a bear action figure]? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:28, 13 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::JohnZ, found your gift, [https://www.swagright.com/collections/washington-free-beacon/products/eric-swalwell-whoopee-cushion just need an address to send it to]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 07:53, 15 December 2019 (EST)
  
==Congress's arrest powers==
+
::After all the tear-jerker stories about how vital Ukraine is to U.S. national security, no one asked the Dems' "experts" How many Americans they think will be willing to die for Ukraine? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:41, 13 November 2019 (EST)
[[Inherent contempt]] was the subject of a recent (March 25) ''Congressional Research Report''. Inherent contempt was used in the [[Tea Pot Dome]] scandal, and threatened to be used by Sen. [[Sam Ervin]] against Alexander Butterfield in the [[Watergate]] hearings (Butterfield maintained Nixon's tape recording system, eventually complied with the subpoena and revealed the existence of the Nixon tapes).  The report says,
+
:''The House or Senate may also seek to utilize the inherent contempt power to enforce compliance with congressional subpoenas issued to executive branch officials. As noted, the Supreme Court has confirmed the existence of each house’s independent and unilateral authority to arrest and detain individuals in order to compel compliance with a subpoena.252 If either the House or Senate was to revive the inherent contempt power, the chamber may consider establishing specific procedures to be followed in its exercise. Such procedures could govern consideration of an inherent contempt resolution and actions of the Sergeant-at-Arms, as well as the process by which the House or Senate would conduct the “trial.”253 These procedures could be established by a one-house resolution or—if both the House and Senate seek to use uniform procedures—by concurrent resolution or by statute. Although rare, the inherent contempt has been used to detain executive branch officials, including for non-compliance with a congressional subpoena....'' [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45653.pdf pg. 33]
+
As I understand it, a court ruling says Congress can't use Inherent contempt in a fishing expedition, but does have the right to arrest and try an individual for obstructing Congress's primary function of legislating (I think that's how it's interpreted).
+
Anyways, it looks like we're set up for the remainder of this term for a series of court battles over Congresses reviving it's powers of subpoena and arrest. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:19, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:Congress's inherent arrest power could not extend beyond its [[Capitol Hill]] grounds, and probably not there either simply for defying a subpoena.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:25, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
::The House dusted off inherent contempt to use against Treasury officials who refused to give up Trump's tax returns,etc. Looks like Nadler just fast-forwarded the strategy to use against Barr. Barr (and all cabinet secretaries) are compelled to testify every 30 days to the Senate. The CRS report is probably worth reading - it's a roadmap for some of the upcoming legal issues. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:31, 30 April 2019 (EDT)
+
:::In 2012, the House held Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for refusing to turn over documents related to Fast and Furious. The Dems didn't even brother to justify withholding these documents. They simply bashed the vote as "a transparently political stunt" (Pfeiffer) and "a crass effort and a grave disservice to the American people" (Holder).[https://www.politico.com/story/2012/06/holder-held-in-contempt-of-congress-077988] This wasn't "inherent contempt," so the sergeant-at-arms wasn't involved. The FBI was supposed to arrest Holder. If Nadler goes ahead with his scheme, Trump can dust off this old warrant and arrest Holder. Make the House vote to release this corrupt doofus or cancel his old citation. Holder is a poster boy for corruption in the Obama administration. He was attorney general during the banking bailout, arrested nobody, and then took a cushy job in the financial industry. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:29, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::It would be refreshing if Trump talked about arresting liberal officials in response to their talk about arresting his advisers.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:51, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Point of fact: the money the government used to bail out the banks was, taken together, paid back in full.  Except for one company, the crisis seemed to be a crisis of confidence among clients rather than real incompetence in lending practices. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 01:19, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
===Legitimate legislative purpose===
+
::::To win in court, Nadler and House Democrats have to argue that the subpoenas of Barr and for Trump's tax returns are related to some pending legislation. Ultimately, it's likely to fail. But this will be the political theater in coming months - that Trump is defying Congress and therefore needs to be impeached, etc. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:36, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::IOWs, Congressional arrest powers must serve a "legislative purpose," as  Asst. Attorney General [https://www.scribd.com/document/408455007/Boyd-Letter-to-Nadler Stephan Boyd relates here]. This is the language used in the Supreme Court ruling cited in the CRS report linked above. Oversight is differentiated from "legislative purposes." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:45, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Why Nadler will loose in court: the subpoena of Barr does not serve "[https://twitter.com/RepDougCollins/status/1125469294521999365 legitimate legislative activities]". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:48, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Again, Mnuchin refuses to turn over Trump tax returns because the request lacks a [https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/mnuchin-rejects-neals-request-trump-tax-returns"legitimate legislative purpose."] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:43, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Another CRS report released today contains this language outlining some of the pitfalls facing Congress:
+
:::::''[https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/LSB10275.pdf the provision can probably be viewed as a statutory delegation of Congress’ investigative and oversight powers to the tax committees, exercise of the authority granted by Section 6103(f) arguably is subject to the same legal limitations that generally attach to Congress’use of other compulsory investigative tools. Notably, the inquiry must further a “legislative purpose” and not otherwise breach relevant constitutional rights or privileges.'']
+
::::Its followed by a discussion on Legislative Purpose. The report is only six pages. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:03, 10 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==Black holes redux==
+
==The subtext==
  
I have to admit that I found the pictures of the woman who proudly displayed the first photographs that she took of what was presented as a black hole were just adorable.
+
Mike Cernovich: Evangelical support for Israel is so high (72% or more) that people who claim to be American nationalists and populists while obsessing over Israel don’t want to win elections.
  
But to me there are still some unanswered questions.
+
Some of you don’t want to give Israel foreign aid. We get it. And this is such a losing issue.
  
In Stephen Hawking's book, ''A Brief History of Time'', one of the chapters is entitled "Black holes ain't so black!", where he declares that black holes (this was back when he said they exist, not later when he said they didn't exist) were surrounded by what came to be called Hawking radiation. So why isn't the photographed black hole surrounded by Hawking radiation rather than appearing black?
+
@CityBureaucrat: It's not about $. It's about the double standard of the U.S. supporting a nation that controls its borders, protects its citizens w/tariffs & socio-economic entitlements, & guarantees a particular identity & way of life against the market, while denying this to U.S. citizens.
  
::It's good that you have read the Hawking book. A few other books I can recommend that give good layman's-level explanations of these topics are
+
The Dem & Repub parties want to demonize and even criminalize advocacy of these policies in the U.S. while effusively supporting Israel and its policies. Using our tax dollars to fund them is an additional slap in the face. I'm sure evangelicals would agree.
::*''The Grand Design'' by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow
+
::*''The Hidden Reality'' by Brian Greene
+
::*''The Elegant Universe'' by Brian Greene
+
::*''Welcome to the Universe'' by Neil deGrasse Tyson
+
::*''Astrophysics for People in a Hurry'' by Neil deGrasse Tyson
+
  
::The reason the "black hole" appears black is that the Hawking radiation is incredibly faint.  You touched on that below.
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:13, 14 November 2019 (EST)
  
Secondly, even if so, why are the hot gases surrounding the black hole only seen in two dimensions?  If you have a two-dimensional vortex like in a pool drain, the water doesn't get sucked into it along a single one-dimensional line in front of it and behind it. So why should a three-dimensional vortex only swallow in matter and energy along a two-dimensional plane?  I understand that there is two-dimensional motion in the case with Jupiter, where its rings fall along a plane.  But the black hole vortex looks more turbulent than one would think the gravity well of Jupiter would be.  So how did there get be what looks like a compromise between the two, and why isn't it unstable?  It seems more likely that the matter and energy are either along a plane or they aren't because deviation from the plane would seem to quickly introduce turbulence that would quickly spread out the matter and energy away from one plane.  But we don't see that.
+
:These are good observations. I'm speechless.  
::The reason the image is in only two dimensions is that that's how pictures work.  We take two-dimensional pictures of things.  Claude Monet's hastacks were three-dimensional, but his paintings were two-dimensional.  And your reference to the accretion disks and polar jets are pesumably inspired by the dozens of "artists impressions" of spinning black holes and vortices that one sees in the popular press.  The recent image of the M87 black hole shows nowhere near enough detail.  All it shows is that there is a central region that appears black.
+
  
Thirdly, if the existence of black holes is based on science, and we think they exist, and then suddenly we think they don't; and one time we think they're black, and then we think they're surrounded by light; and then one time we think there's an event horizon where matter never escapes, and then we think there's an apparent horizon where matter can escape, how is this called science, which means highly-supported knowledge, when the interpretations keep changing?
+
:I recall Israel's 30th birthday, when Israel became a man (according to Jewish tradition). That was 40 years ago. If someone dared utter these sentences then in public, print, or broadcast, they would immediately be branded a Nazi. So, in part, it kinda depends on the ''Zeitgeist''Today for example scratching your butt without asking the gods of climate change to stave of the apocalypse makes one a Nazi. So I'm really confused and can't give any meaningful response. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:42, 14 November 2019 (EST)
::I don't think anyone said they don't exist, after the discovery of Cygnus X1 some time ago.  The idea that the "don't exist" comes from the more recent (but still some time ago) theory that they aren't ''completely'' black, because of Hawhing radiation. But this is just a childishly rigid interpretation of language. I have a pair of "black" shoes that aren't completely black.  People use "black" to refer to a color, characterized by nearly no reflection or radiation.  People accept a significant amount of leeway in the way they use language.  As another example, the active substance in a "lead pencil", or a replacement "lead" for a mechanical pencil, isn't lead.  It's a clay/graphite mixture.  Everyone accepts that imprecise language.  It's the same with black holes.  When people say (as they have been saying for over 200 years) that "no light can escape" they weren't saying that no advance in quantum mechanics could ever allow for a single photon ever to appear to be coming out of a black hole.
+
::This is a reference to Hosea 11:1? "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." (ESV) [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:25, 14 November 2019 (EST)
:::No, this announcement that conditions weren't right for black holes to exist in the universe came long after the published ideas about Hawking radiation came out, I think sometime in the last 15 years.  Hawking himself agreed, so it's not something you'd forgetAnd after that came the business of the "apparent horizon", and though the discussions came close together in time, I don't know if the two declarative descriptions were connected. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 23:55, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::
+
:::Andy Schlafly linked to it further up on the page:
+
::::Stephen Hawking: "There Are No Black Holes. [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes/]
+
::Yes, I've read the Scientific American article.  It's actually been up there for quite some time.  It's too bad that Andy seems to take that as evidence that the entities commonly called black holes simply do not exist, or, more broadly, that relativity is wrong.  Please don't fall into that trap.  It's unfortunate that things that seem to have been written to be provocative (the introductory paragraph even says "would probably be dismissed as cranks") are sometimes latched onto as precisely serious and correct.
+
  
::The phenomenon of the "firewall" and the "apparent horizon" refer to quantum mechanical effects at a distance of the Planck length (10<sup>-35</sup> meters) above the "classical" Einstein/Schwarzschild radius. This is extremely tiny.  But we already know that the conflict between gravity and quantum mechanics occurs over a distance of the Planck length. At anything resembling normal distances, there is no conflict, and General Relativity is correct.
+
:I have a few things to say about this.
 +
::1. Mike Cernovich is a fraud. He recently was exposed by Lee Stranahan to having accepted money from Saudi sources in exchange for spewing propaganda that al-Qaeda and ISIS are rooted in the Muslim Brotherhood, and '''not''' the Muslim World League. This is significant because this means Cernovich is being paid to lie about which countries are the largest sponsors of Islamist terrorism. Iran, Qatar, and Turkey all do sponsor terrorism, but none hold a candle to the Saudi regime. But in Cernovich Land, those three get all the blame and Saudi Arabia can do no wrong. Go ahead and try to bring up the Muslim World League on Cernovich's Twitter. He won't even try to debate you. He'll straight up block you, even if you mention the MWL in good faith.
 +
:::Completely irrelevant.  Cernovich just teed up the ball with some conventional wisdom about Israel for @CityBureaucrat to hit. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 02:18, 15 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::2. I personally think Israel is getting too much flak from people like @CityBureaucrat. Yes, it's hypocritical for our politicians to do that, but that's no reason to tear Israel down. If Israel's doing the right thing, then leave it alone. Plain and simple.
 +
::3. That being said, Israel is '''not''' doing the right thing. I'm not talking about its immigration policies. I'm talking about its foreign policy. Many young conservatives like myself are becoming lukewarm or even hostile towards Israel because of Netanyahu's obsession with Iran. This is causing Israel to embrace even worse actors like Saudi Arabia, and covertly endorsing policies that could cause the US to get into an armed conflict with one of our own NATO allies. This is unacceptable and it must be called out for the sake of our national security.
 +
::4. In hindsight, I believe moving the embassy to Jerusalem was a mistake. In doing so, we have essentially rewarded bad behavior. If the location of the embassy is such a hot button issue for Netanyahu, then perhaps we can use it as a leverage. Perhaps we should give him an ultimatum: reverse your recent foreign policy shifts, or we move the embassy back to Tel Aviv. And if you refuse to do so even after we move the embassy back to Tel Aviv, then we will close the embassy and then there will be no embassy at all.
 +
:I rest my case.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:02, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::Iran is hardly a benign entity. Should a PM and cabinet ignore reality and practical solutions in favor of theoretical ideals and the way we would like things to be? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:16, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Netanyahu already is ignoring reality. The reality is that the true nature of our Sunni Arab so-called "allies" in the region have been exposed in the aftermath of the Syrian war, and the American people are not happy. More and more Americans (especially younger Americans) are rejecting our alliances with these countries, and some (myself included) even support normalizing relations with Iran because they believe we're supporting the wrong side in the greater Sunni-Shiite conflict. Eventually, this shift in public opinion will lead to a shift in policy. If Netanyahu expects the Israeli-American friendship to survive, he'd better adapt to these changes. So far, he's not doing that. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 18:38, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::Ok, granted, much of what you say is true and makes sense. However Shi'a Iran will (1) never be an American ally in the sense of a vassal state like Germany, the UK, or Japan. It will ally itself with the US to destroy the Saudi monarchy only, then (2) spread its brand of Shi'a hegemony over Mecca and Medina.
 +
::::Israel's chief concern is loosing its nuclear monopoly. Right now the threat of nuclear annihilation allows for reprisals against Gaza or Syrian missile attacks. The missiles are built by the Iranian military industrial complex; we've very recently seen technical improvements in Iranian drone missile attacks launched by Houtis with pin-point targeting to wipe out 50% of Saudi oil refinery capacity and move world oil prices. The same weaponry will show up in Gaza soon and replace the old-fashioned "bottle rocket" attacks.
 +
::::If Israel looses its nuclear monopoly, it will (1) set off a nuclear arms race in the region between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,  Iran, and Israel; and (2) Israel will loose its nuclear leverage in cross-border reprisal attacks against Hezbollah in Syria and missiles coming from Gaza.
 +
::::Barring an Iranian/Israeli rapprochement in the event of the fall of the Saudi regime and rise of Iranian Shi'a hegemony, violent Sunni resistance would likely continue - even if Iran became recognized masters of the region and were awarded a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Israel fears the likely response of Iranian Shi'a becoming hegemonic - the traditional way to promote Islamic unity and quell sectarian difference is to scapegoat the Jews as the source of the world's problems.
 +
::::An Israeli/Iranian rapprochement seems to be the policy of all three - the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Israel - as the only way to stave off violence and the threat of a nuclear arms race, which becomes more and more likely each day. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:12, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::What's the lesson from all this? Policies built on demonizing individuals (Netanyahu, Putin, Trump, Kim jong un, Gadaffi, Baghdadi, Osama, the Ayatollah, Saddam, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mugabe Castro, Meduro, Duarte, MBS, Erdogen etc etc etc), while enjoying immediate popular appeal, are always fraught with problems. Policy must be separated from the person, and the focus must always be policy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:20, 16 November 2019 (EST)
  
::I suggest that you read that article again, very carefully.  Ask yourself a few questions:  What is the difference between black holes not existing because relativity is wrong and "conditions [not being] right for black holes to exist in the universe"?  Where did you get that latter statement?  It isn't cited. Are you using language in a less-than-fanatically-rigid way?  That's fine, but you need to think about where you are going when you do that. And, most importantly, if black holes can't, or don't, exist, why have Stephen Hawking and many others been doing so much research on the subject?  What is the thing that the "firewall" surrounds?  What are the "event horizon" and "apparent horizon" if neither one of them exists?
+
==Confirmed==
+
To understand the complete Russia collusion hoax and impeachment scheme, [https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/440730-how-the-obama-white-house-engaged-ukraine-to-give-russia-collusion read this John Solomon article from April 25] this year. Solomon states
::If you approached a black hole to within a few times the Planck length, what you would see is what Einstein and Schwarzschild predicted long ago. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:18, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:''"The January 2016 gathering....brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with '''members of former President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ)....U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united,” said Andrii Telizhenko, then a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington tasked with organizing the meeting." '''
John Selway said it was due to change of opinion. But isn't opinion the ''opposite'' of science: weakly-supported knowledge ''versus'' highly-supported knowledge?  Someone might answer, they're disputed questions.  But if so, why do we have to respect the answer to these questions as if they were settled science?  And how are we to know whether they ''are'' settled or disputed? Obviously the ''prestige'' of Stephen Hawking and other famous 20th to 21st-century scientists isn't sufficient to determine the question.  The [[climategate]] scandal, among others, which continues to this very day, show scientists have political or theological interests which cause them to selectively promote or conceal different ideas according to their convenience in pursuing those interests.  Which goes to show that often what is presented as science is really just speculation and not honest speculation at that. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 01:10, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Perhaps "opinion" wasn't a good way to put it.  In any case, what John Selway wrote, for better or worse, doesn't affect the existence or nonexistence of these things. If you believe that people are changing their "opinions" and that that refutes science, you're welcome to hold that view.  But most people take a more flexible and nuanced view of how language works, and how science works.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:45, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:That discussion of the "pictured" black hole's size further up on this page helped answer one of my questions. Hawking says:
+
Eric Ciaramella signed Andrii Telizhenko (spelled Andrey) into the White House on January 19, 2016, ''per'' White House visitor logs obtained by Judicial Watch. ("telizhenko,andriy,g,U67540,100561,VA,1/19/16 10:57,D1101,1/19/16 12:53,,01/19/2016 12:00:00 AM,1/19/16 11:00,1/19/16 23:59,,1,KH,WIN,1/19/16 10:51,KH,Ciaramella,Eric,OEOB,230A,HARTWELL,KYLE,,,04/29/2016 07:00:00 AM +0000",,,," [https://archive.org/download/WHvisitorlogs_2010-16_surname/White-House-visitor-logs6_Sorr-Zyz.csv] [https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-white-house-visitor-logs-detail-meetings-of-eric-ciaramella/ Judicial Watch: White House Visitor Logs Detail Meetings of Eric Ciaramella.])
::[A] black hole ought to emit particles and radiation as if it were a hot body with temperature that depends only on the black hole's mass: the higher the mass, the lower the temperature. (p. 105)
+
:So evidently high mass = low glow. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 07:48, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Yes. Just a rough guess would be that it's like 10<sup>-33</sup> (for Planck's constant in reasonable units) times 10<sup>-10</sup> (for size of the M87 black hole relative to the Sun) times 10<sup>-30</sup> (for size of the Sun in reasonable units). Not being an expert in this, I could be way off, but it's still incredibly small.  Observing a single photon or particle from Hawking radiation is a fairly futile exercise.  It's completely theoretical at this time.  (But remember that detecting gravitational waves was completely theoretical until recently.)  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:45, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
===Einstein's hangup on black holes===
+
Solomon writes in April of this year:  
Einstein had his problems with a black hole, and he wrote this paper [https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.48.73] in part to discount the idea of one.  But he also helped to write this one [https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777] because he thought there was something wrong with his ideas of quantum mechanics, which to physicists mean entanglements between two bodies, which led to this 2013 paper [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/prop.201300020] linking wormholes to black holes.  I'm speculating here, but I believe that Einstein probably was concerned about the science fiction aspect of the subject rather than the science.  You can "prove" a wormhole tunnel with a black hole at either end via physics, but to have such a thing out there in reality is a bit of a stretch. Anyway, the Einstein papers are there, and they are very interesting reads.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 13:15, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:''Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.''
  
== More bad news for militant atheists in 2019. 2019 will be the worst year in the history of atheism ==
+
Shut down the Biden case and frame Manafort. It's all right there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 03:41, 14 November 2019 (EST)
[[Image:Amish Republicans.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Many Amish have large families and in 2012 the Amish were named the fastest growing faith group in the United States and the Amish population is projected to grow to 1 million people by 2050.[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/1130/For-Amish-fastest-growing-faith-group-in-US-life-is-changing]
+
  
In the above picture, Amish residents are waving to President George W. Bush (Lancaster, Pa., August 2006)]]
+
:Aha! So the Obama Administration was worried about the Biden deal in the Ukraine not very much less, if not in fact, more, than Trump was! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 04:50, 14 November 2019 (EST)
The [[Amish]] population explosion and what it says about a more [[conservative]] future.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uqvi5kozc6Q] In Lancaster County, [[Pennsylvania]], the Amish population is doubling every 20 years despite urban sprawl.[https://www.witf.org/news/2019/04/lancaster-county-amish-population-thrives-despite-sprawl.php] See also: [[Desecularization]]
+
::This is beyond the FBI, DOJ, and John Brennan now. Ukrainian prosecutors were instructed by the Obama White House to clear Hunter Biden (or you're not gettin' the cash) and dig up the old 2014 allegations against Manafort, which the FBI dismissed in 2014, to frame Manafort.
 +
::The Obama White House colluded with a foreign government to interfere in American elections. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:44, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::I guess Mueller's prosecutors were investigating the wrong country. How about that? Not that it would've mattered; they only bothered to investigate potential Russian collusion with regard to ''Trump''.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:54, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Soon we'll learn that Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian President was another FISA leak while the FBI inspector general sleeps on. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:58, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::Why is it surprising to learn the Obama White House colluded with a foreign government to meddle in American elections? Globalists don't believe in sovereignty or borders - unless of course it's Ukraine's and not our own. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:58, 14 November 2019 (EST)
  
Many Amish have large families and in 2012 the Amish were named the fastest growing faith group in the United States and the Amish population is projected to grow to 1 million people by 2050.[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/1130/For-Amish-fastest-growing-faith-group-in-US-life-is-changing]
+
==Jim Jordan remarks==
  
[[Eric Kaufmann]] is entirely correct. Religious fundamentalism will grow in the Western World and world at large in the 21st century. See: [[Growth of religious fundamentalism]]
+
"Today the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, Vadym Prystaiko, verified what we already knew: 'I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance.'"
  
2019 will be the worst year in the [[History of Atheism|history of atheism]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:23, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Rep. Jordan also said the Ukraine was known for government corruption, and Trump's State Department, including John Bolton, investigated the Ukrainian President while aid was being delayed, and other members of the State Department in the Ukraine paid him visits.  There were statutory requirements passed by the U.S. Congress that U.S. aid be paid within a certain time, so Trump couldn't have indefinitely delayed aid even if he had wanted to.  The delay lasted 55 days. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 02:48, 15 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:"Madam Ambassador, I want to thank you for your opening remarks and the high regard in which you hold yourself." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:27, 15 November 2019 (EST)
  
:Don't think they're not feeling it—each December the ''Atheist Yearbook'' listing their accomplishments just keeps getting smaller and smaller.  And yet they ''still'' insist on using the "C.E." year nomenclature, like ''Atheist Yearbook, 2018 C.E.'' I mean why tempt fate by making everybody mad when you don't need to? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 20:06, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
== I say, Holmes! ==
  
==Appeal for justice==
+
[https://edition-m.cnn.com/2019/11/15/politics/david-holmes-testimony/index.html That's gotta hurt...] Sondland will have "refresh" his memory once again when he testifies next week. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:03, 15 November 2019 (EST)
  
What is justice?  In a human being, it is that equable temper from which all fitting actions flow. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 19:32, 1 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:If it's from CNN, it's fake news.  [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 01:30, 16 November 2019 (EST)
:Justice is raising the [[minimum wage]] so [[white privilege]]d kids get pay raises and [[black]] kids get [[unemployed]]. That's an easy question that everybody knows the answer to. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:01, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::What about illegal aliens who get free medical care in emergency rooms, a driver's license, [aren't loyal citizens, don't cost the expense of OSHA training or equipment,] don't pay taxes and don't return their wages to the local economy? They can out-compete blacks and teens regardless of the minimum wage. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 17:00, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Or Congressional support for human trafficking and drug smuggling. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:17, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::What we need is a bit of the ''old'' [[Robert Mueller]] who runs sting operations against customers of sex-trafficking like [[Eliot Spitzer]]. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 21:21, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Looks like [[John Brennan]], [[Sally Yates]] and [[John Carlin]] need to start [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html looking over their shoulders] for the SWAT team. And I wanna see [[Nellie Ohr]]'s [https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/441580-nellie-ohrs-hi-honey-emails-to-doj-about-russia-collusion-should-alarm-us#.XMoCeaNTrcY.twitter mugshot so we can upload it] for her bio. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 08:46, 3 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Article/Essay idea ==
+
::I'm amazed. Does anyone still actually watch CNN? Why? Why would a person do that to themselves? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 07:41, 16 November 2019 (EST)
  
Hey all - I read the Greatest Conservative movies essay yesterday and if gave me an idea. I play video games but the only ones I like and play are the ones that don't glorify violence (like the GTA series for example) and there are games out there that push a different message. I would like to create an essay detailing games with a more conservative theme because they do exist and some are quite popular. Would that be something of interest? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 15:39, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:"Dem witnesses all seem to think congressional hearings are Queen For a Day tryouts," observed Ann Coulter. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 09:06, 16 November 2019 (EST)
:Actually, [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Video Games|something like that already exists]]. You can contribute to it, however. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 15:42, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::The Democrats are betting the farm on this one. They've pressured Trump with an FBI investigation since at least November or December 2015 (looks like Comey and McCabe will both be charged), Mueller from May 2017 til April 2019, Nadler and Schiff since January 2019. We have a full year to go before voters can put a stop to it.  
::Oh great - thanks! I'll add a few. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 15:45, 2 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::If Trump finally smashes the Black monolith support for Democrats, barring the GOP falling into corruption scandals, the Democrats are toast for decades. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:37, 16 November 2019 (EST)
  
== New chant for [[Elizabeth Warren]] student loan amnesty rally ==
+
:::Aye. The very idea Trump might be the man for that particular job is the perfect illustration of just how divorced from reality you actually are. But back to Sondland... obviously not the sharpest tool on opsec and in ''way'' over his head now. And I don't see anything in his previous political and business activities suggesting he's the kind of fierce partisan who'd be willing to put Trump ahead of saving his own skin. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:03, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:OMG! Vote rigging and stealing in Lousy-ana! Shocking! [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 06:00, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
[speaks through bullhorn] We didn't mean for the poor Obama economy to hit those most likely to have been undergoing liberal indoctrination...So thanks to the U.S. government...
+
===Democrat racism===
 +
::::Actually, the fact that Kayne West became a Trump supporter, and various blacks participated in Walk-Away more than shows that, if anything, Trump is, if not the man for that particular job of smashing the Black monolith, then certainly coming very close to it. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:06, 16 November 2019 (EST)
  
All:<br> The more you squandered...the more you get.<br>
+
:::::You should probably talk to more black people. The likes of Candace Owens and Diamond & Silk are widely derided as putting on a minstrel show for the benefit of a white GOP audience. Kanye gets a partial pass on the strength of his earlier albums, and a kind of Michael Jackson-esque sympathy for his increasing levels of eccentricity. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:20, 16 November 2019 (EST)
Let's all pay off student debt!<br>
+
::::::Actually, there's a few more people besides Diamond and Silk/Candace Owens or even Kayne West who left the Democrats. In fact, many of them even have YouTube videos explaining this. I'd know because my mom watched quite a few of them. Also, let me remind you that Colonel Allen West is for the GOP as well, well before Donald Trump even entered the 2016 presidential election. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:22, 16 November 2019 (EST)
:
+
:::::::Well, let's look on the bright side, eh? Trump managed 8% last time out, so in the unlikely event he hits 10% in 2020, he can claim he increased his share of the black vote by a whopping 25%. Winning! [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:52, 16 November 2019 (EST)
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 08:42, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::20-25% of people showing up at Trump rallies are Democrats. And many of them are black. Trump is over 40% approval among black men. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:57, 16 November 2019 (EST)
:In 1992, Paul Tsongas attacked Bill Clinton as "Pander Bear" and carried around a stuffed Panda bear to his primary rallies. It didn't work. Being anti-pander does not hit home in the Democratic party. Warren is trying to lock down the student vote (pity the poor students, torn between Warren and Buttigieg, student debt vs gay rights). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:57, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::You're using "many" in a way I've never come across before. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:27, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::What's unusual about Black Democrats showing up at a Trump rally? They didn't ask their Masters first? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:58, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
== Restraint of trade, and Facebook hides it ==
+
:::::::::::Keep rocking the plantation metaphor, man. It's as good a plague sign as any above your imaginary "Blexit" door. Use it as often as possible. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:24, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::::Actually, I like your idea of noting that [[CNN]] called Kanye West an "attention w****", but looks like it got reverted before I could verify The Wrap article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:28, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::::::Essay:Top conservatives on Twitter shows many more blacks than the two you mentioned—should I put labels on them to be sure to satisfy the quota you personally have in mind?  Or maybe it's not so bad, and we just need to answer you one! last! time!  It would fairly easy to do, so if we don't do it it ''proves'' that we're ''afraid!''
  
Leftists are making their move to criminalize conservatism according to ally to conservatives [[Paul Joseph Watson]].  Watson reported a news story that found a leftist group pressuring MasterCard to set up a board, the members of which would define political extremism and direct MasterCard in denying their services to them. This is a certain step towards ''restraint of trade'', an action illegally applied to anyone but criminal enterprises; so with two jumps, the leftists think they can control and move the board leftwardly, and the leftist media can call organizations they are already falsely calling extreme, dangerous and in this way restrain the trade of conservatives and their allies as leverage to suppress conservatism and conservative voices.
+
:::::::::::Or just maybe you won't be satisfied for the umpteenth time, and next week you'll be back spouting off your sour generalizations that you didn't research.  And notwithstanding the lack of knowledge, insisting your view is the correct one, however often your previous assertions got refuted.  And that it's still our job to refute it on your behalf if possible despite the obvious political convenience for you that always seems to be attached to making your bald assertions. If skepticism with prejudice are harnessed to aid your self-advancement rather than the pursuit of the truth, it's really no skepticism at all! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 13:51, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::::The racism of JohnZ is exactly the racism of the Democratic party that Blacks are rebelling against - being stereotyped as "liberal" when in fact they are God-fearing churchgoing community loving, pro-family patriots. They resent being taken for granted and used, as Pete Buttigieg just did in Black-dominated South Carolina where he trails magnificently against Joe Biden, despite being a white media darling. Biden is buoyed in national polls by Blacks because he's not perceived as a liberal. And how have Democrats responded with the flight of Blacks? tossing them more bones with "wepawations" - an ultimate insult cause Democrats think Blacks are too stupid to compete in society and too lame to make it without their white liberal Masters' help. JohnZ is playing with dynamite tossing around these racist smears against Blacks. And these same idiot liberals accuse Trump of playing and manipulating people's fears. What balderdash that even <s>poor kids</s> I mean Blacks can see with their own two eyes.
 +
::::::::::::There is a disconnect between white and black in the Democratic party, and it is this - Blacks have become waaaay more sophisticated in coalition building and having influence to serve their needs than white liberals have, who view Blacks as tokens who you mollify by tossing them bones, ever since Lyndon Johnson came up with the idea - which they learn in Black History month. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:41, 23 November 2019 (EST)
  
Shortly afterwards, Watson's account was removed from Facebook as well as conservative Laura Loomer's and ally to conservatives [[Milo Yiannopoulos]]'s as they simultaneously removed [[Louis Farrakhan]]'s account, leftist media cynically labeling him right-wing as well to attempt to fool potential black supporters while smearing conservatives with Farrahkan's extremism, topping a series of abuses by social media that began against Watson's patron [[Infowars]] a few months ago.
+
:::::::::::::Aye. Black voters are ''definitely'' going to flock to a conservative movement that denies the [[southern strategy]] was even a thing; where ''[[The Bell Curve]]'' is reported on uncritically; and in which eejits like you casually sling plantation metaphors around. But I sleep soundly in the knowledge that you won't take any of this onboard, and will carry on being a walking, talking prophylactic for your very own cause. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:39, 23 November 2019 (EST)
  
The situation has degenerated to the point where it has managed to annoy our President, who has expressed it on Twitter, and whom I would imagine is not without sharing some of our own incredulity.
+
::::::::::::::Congrats, JohnZ, you just proved RobS's point with your condescending response.  You also need to watch your step about insulting other editors because you're already on the brink as it is. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 19:38, 23 November 2019 (EST)
  
Let this be a lesson to trust Andy's judgment in the political realm—he foresaw Facebook's ill potential, which has now devolved the social media site into the petty tyranny in which we now see it to be sunk.
+
[[Donald Trump]] Poll Numbers SURGE During Impeachment Hearings as Democrats Admit DEFEAT.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB6OoCWc2Hk]
  
In the meantime I would advise you to keep an eye out for the restraint of trade issues so you are not blindsided by events into a shocked silence. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 12:39, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
JohnZ,  watch this video and start weeping inconsolably!!!!!  Donald Trump and his supporters keep winning! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:11, 16 November 2019 (EST)
:We need articles on [[restraint of trade]] and [[Inherent contempt]]. It's better to be ahead of the curve rather than always playing catch-up. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:43, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==White nationalist category==
+
::A Steve Turley video?  Really?  You expect JohnZ (or me) to weep inconsolably from that?  A Steve Turley YouTube video?  Really?  Have you looked at his videos?  On the other hand, have you tried reading books?  Real books by real authors?  People who know what they are talking about, as opposed to right-wing YouTube people?  And citing them instead of YouTube videos?
 +
::Be that as it may, it's good to see you back, my friend.  For a while I was afraid that you were actually going to follow through on your oft-stated resolve to stop your manic editing habits.  Or maybe you were just handing that task off to your friend Wikignome72. So it's good to see, from your 29 edits in 70 minutes this morning, that you are still on-message.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:10, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::SamHB, unlike you [Wrong; see my user boxes&mdash;[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:46, 21 November 2019 (EST)], Dr. [[Steve Turley]] is an author.  I have his book on the book ''The Abolition of Man'' who is a book by C.S. Lewis.  And yes, I have seen his videos and like them. Lastly, your continual use of logical fallacies in your "reasoning" is counterproductive (see: [[genetic fallacy]] and [https://www.fallacies.ca/style.htm Style over substance fallacy]). For example,  an informative video is far better than a wrongheaded and poorly researched book.22:51, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::I should have been more careful when I claimed you were not an author. My apologies.
  
Why would anyone interested in finding solutions to political issues that make use of a conceptual category unless it were to help understand the issue being discussed?  Because they weren't arguing in good faith to begin with.
+
::::Secondly, Dr. Turley is a well informed man.  Like most careful scholars, he makes reasonable statements/claims. The one exception to this is his belief that Trump is a shoo-in to be reelected. I do think 2020 is going to be a brutal U.S. presidential campaign and it is not going to be a cakewalk. Given these factors, I do think Trump has over a 50% chance of being reelected: power of incumbency, the current strong US economy may continue in 2020, Trump did a good job of keeping his promises, the weakness of the current Democrats running to be president, Trump's huge campaign chest, etc.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:28, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Aye. Tell that to Eddie Rispone. I'm sure it'll be of great comfort. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:27, 16 November 2019 (EST)
  
"White nationalism" is being shown to have bamboozled even more well-meaning conservatives at the end of last week than you'd like to have expected:
+
::JohnZ, the Allies didn't win every battle, but they won WWII.  The Vietcong lost battle after battle after battle, but now the communist rule Vietnam.  The idea that you have to win every battle to win a war is a very unreasonable position.
  
:You’re calling P[aul] J[oseph] W[atson], [Alex] Jones, Milo [Yiannopoulos] and [Laura] Loomer white nationalists?
+
::Have you read the article [[Decline of the secular left]]?  I especially like the John Feffer quote near the top of the article. The further decline of the secular left is inevitable.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:56, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:JohnZ, read [http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index3046.htm Sorcha Faal] today; for once you can take it 100% at face value - their analysis of the Lousy-ana election. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:43, 18 November 2019 (EST)
  
:Please stop clogging my mentions with low-IQ stupidity. Thanks.
+
::Hahaha. Fair play, man. That's sufficiently swivel-eyed and spittle-flecked that you seem positively Zen and lucid in comparison. [https://youtube.com/watch?v=vNjiFwukX8M You gotta give me a big win please, OK? OK?] [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:42, 18 November 2019 (EST)
  
:—Brittany Pettibone
+
===Vietnam, etc.===
  
"Trump News" (that is President Trump's Twitter account) has an audience of 60 million, while CNN has a viewing audience that stays much of the time less than 2 million, and Trump has shown that he is able to pressure CNN (as recorded on Conservapedia's Main Page Right) and those like it to indirectly signal to the social media giants to back off their attempts at a conservative purgeCNN folded their campaign of negativity against Trump and broadcast editorially at the end of last week that Trump deserves credit for a healthy U.S. economy.
+
:::Technically, the Communists never even won the Vietnam War, not while we Americans were still in it anyway. What happened was the American left, after exploiting Watergate to get a supermajority in Congress, reneigned on America's end of the deal and cut out weapons shipments to South Vietnam to help them win the war, with Ford being powerless to stop it. Just watch Prager University's explanation on it: https://youtu.be/7hqYGHZCJwk [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:03, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::A Youtube video from Dennis Prager?  Dennis Prager?  The right-wing radio host who runs a YouTube channel that he calls a "University"?  Really?  Have you looked at his videos?  On the other hand, have you tried reading books?  Real books by real authors?  People who know what they are talking about, as opposed to right-wing YouTube people?  And citing them instead of YouTube videos?  By the way, the Vietnam war ended over 40 years agoMany many books have been written about it.  Please read some of them.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:10, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::That's exactly what happened. The Mujaheen defeated the Soviets when the U.S. supplied weapons; Iran prevented Saddam from overrruning Kuwait when the U.S. provided weapons. South Vietnam lost when Democrats cut off weapons (and the [[Killing Fields|leftist genocide of South East Asia]] ensued, which any Vietnamese immigrant to the U.S. can attest, and incidentally, [[John Brennan]] voted for). We're having the same debate now; Obama refused to provide weapons to Ukraine. Trump has done so and communists want to impeach him for it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:48, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
But for a brief time there was a swell of misinformation being directed at conservatives, some of which was along the lines of "white nationalism".
+
::::Pokeria, the communists won in Vietnam.  If a boxer walks out of a fight, he loses the match. The Soviets lost in Afghanistan as will the USA. America is tired of endless wars.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:25, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
This was a category that no one cared about, and then one week it was a category that news broadcasters insisted was something dangerous that everybody needed to care about.
+
:::::No, a boxer walking out of a fight means he walked out of a fight. An actual loss in a boxing match involves a boxer being utterly beaten into submission, ie, either failing to regain consciousness during the 10-second countdown, or otherwise doing a total knockout. And considering America was the one who headed the treaty obligations, as pointed out by Prager University, it was in fact America that won Vietnam when we left. Unfortunately, the anti-war, anti-American left sabotaged the South Vietnamese allies after Watergate. As far as being tired of endless wars, want an end to endless wars? Drop a nuke on all hostile countries and forcibly depopulate them. That eliminates the enemy and thus ends any reason to even have a war, even if it means turning the world into charcoal as a result. And I'm pretty sure even you realize that's a very awful way to go about it, far worse than participating in endless wars. Until Communism and Islam is completely annihilated, we have to fight (and I'm speaking VERY personally due to being all too aware of the Christian persecutions committed by Communist and Islamic governments. In fact, China becoming Communist, as well as Eastern Europe being turned Communist? That blood is on our hands as well, so no we cannot afford to stop fighting, even for the sake of stopping endless wars.). Otherwise, we'll have the blood on our hands when Communists take over and slaughter everyone, including our fellow Christians. You really want that? Then you're no different than the anti-war left, and if I must be blunt, don't even deserve to be called "Conservative". At least with Syria, we already broke the backs of ISIS, so there's no longer any reason to be concerned about leaving Syria. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:23, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Huh? Why did Obama illegally place troops in Syria without Congressional authorization and in violation of the [[War Powers Act]]? Was it to:
 +
::::::(a) fight and disarm the Sunni forces he created in two Presidential Findings in 2012? or
 +
::::::(b) fight the spread of Iranian hegemony and destabilize the Syrian regime?
 +
:::::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:38, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Honestly, I've given up on thinking on why Obama did those things other than just plain old anti-Americanism. I may have had my hesitations of our leaving Syria due to it possibly leading to a redux of Vietnamization, but after the more Palpatine-esque drawing out of a high-ranking ISIS leader to be killed as well as his second in command, I no longer have any worries on that front. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 15:22, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::To be sure, the remnants of ISIS will reconstitute themselves somewhere, sometime (Yemen? Afghanistan?) and recruit a fresh generation of jihadi figheters. But that is for President Ivanka Trump, President Nikki Haley, or President Dan Crenshaw to worry about. The only two immediate problems are (1) Clinton cash (through Saudi and Qatari donors) going to reconstitute the force, or (2) in the event of that failing, ISIS remnants getting back in bed with Iranians to destabilize the Saudi regime. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:21, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Trump often takes a zig-zag approach to his decision-making, and he may be the U.S. President where it's entirely justified due to his being the subject of spying (by the deep state) while still in office. Trump [https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/trump-us-securing-syrian-oil has decided to leave some troops in northern Syria], whom he claims will be there to protect Syria's oil infrastructure. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:43, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
They were correct—but the only danger was to left-wing political success.
+
== Make Hong Kong great again ==
  
In American politics, there emerged different "identity groups"; ethnic and special interest minority groups that gathered to support each other in places like universities, large businesses and neighborhoods, and I think it's familiar to lot of people that they promoted policies to shield themselves from being marginalized. These policies were maybe a little aggressive, but again, I think most would say that they were promoted because they wanted to direct positive attention to themselves.
+
[[File:Make Hong Kong great again.jpg|thumb|Poster for Hong Kong district council candidate Phillip Khan]]Police and protesters are gearing up for an epic rumble on the campus of Hong Kong Polytechnic University, just a few blocks away from where I am. I got as close as I could until the cops shooed me away. All I got to see were rows of police vans and firetrucks.
  
This turned out to be a slippery slope, however and the "shields" turned and are turning into a "sword". And even groups that, by interest, were non-political, had members, because they favored liberal views, made a point of introducing liberal themes, or if not that, themes that would make it easier for them to be compatible with other "identity" groups with liberal themes should some tangentially liberal (often hoped for) common interest arise.
+
On a more positive note, I noticed some clever advertising by district council candidate Phillip Khan: "Make Hong Kong great again." How's this for a savvy constitutional approach: "universal suffrage...under the Basic Law." Hong Kong girls tell me he is the best-looking candidate. The district council elections, scheduled for November 24, are the way early first step in the election process, the city's Iowa primary. Hong Kong's last round of elections were shamelessly rigged by the Communist Party, leading to the current crisis of legitimacy.
 +
[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:28, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Sort of like the Gresham's Law of democracy - where Democrats and communists control things, you have rigged elections. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:54, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It seems like the best time to protest would've been when the British handed over the city. But why now? --Jpatt 13:33, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:[promoted by VM] Very good question. Here's a plausible response: 1997 was still in the immediate shadow of Tiannanmen (1989) but with the promise of the CCP joining the [[WTO]] (2002) everyone thought free trade would cure communism and promote democracy, as East Germany and the former USSR and other Soviet satellites were experimenting with then.  
  
This didn't pass unobserved by conservatives even from the beginning, and ideas like a "white students union" at universities were floated, and while a few whites and other majoritarian groups experienced disadvantage by these types of groups' activities, the ideas were more of a kind of commentary in jest of commonly-held suspicions of cynical favoritism held by many of the groups' members, especially in the context of liberals' simultaneous fervent professions of cherishing ideals of broad and consistent egalitarianism.
+
:Time has shown that free trade did more to promote the spread of corruption than it did democracy, as [[Hunter Biden]], [[Joe Biden]], [[Bill Browder]], and the Ukraine are just a few living examples that can we can use as examples. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:49, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
[promoted by VM] I took a stroll down Nathan earlier this evening and the commie-cops fired tear gas at me. That’s a sentence you don’t get to write every day. With the cloud closing in, I hightailed it down a side street. A few minutes later, I pulled out a handkerchief to protect my face. An EMS worker saw this and rushed over to put water on my face. The police announcer switched to English when she noticed me: “Don’t stay here! Don’t stay here! The police are coming!” I guess white privilege is a thing after all.
  
Am I treading well-travelled paths for you so far?  Or have I just observed this alone? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 09:38, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
I scouted the area around PolyU. The police have the campus sealed off now. The headlines warn of "lethal force."  I think we are looking at a predawn raid, which would be in just a few hours.
:How long do you think it will be before Bill Barr wants to castrate gays, stone feminists and abortion activists, ship blacks back to Africa, and make transgenders pee outside by the dumpster? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:04, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:Demonizing Barr has made [https://thehill.com/homenews/house/441762-ocasio-cortez-joins-calls-for-barr-to-resign Ocasio-Cortez a team player again.] He's gotta be a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot. Democrat unity in 2020 depends on it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:37, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
Thank you for taking an interest. Bill Barr fortunately seems to have resources at his disposal, not the least of which is "Trump News" which, through the person and writings of Trump himself, immediately went right to the top of media food chain to question their value to America.
+
As far as the history goes, there were massive protests in 2003 when the government tried to impose Article 23. At that time, the Hu Jintao government backed down. Communist rule was reasonably popular in Hong Kong for the next decade or so. The faction of the party that Xi Jinping belongs to has always thought that Hu made a mistake. When Xi became president in 2012, one of the first things he did was to make the Hong Kong "local government" subordinate to the local branch of the Communist Party, or "Liaison Office." In 2016, they disqualified several opposition politicians so that the government could retain a majority in the legislature. The current protests started after an extradition bill was proposed in March. This bill would have given the Communists the authority to extradite Hong Kongers to the mainland. Xi is known to be pretty upset about the publication of anti-Communist books, among other things that are legal in Hong Kong but not tolerated on the mainland. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 15:18, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:So, you're reporting from Hong Kong? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:50, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It's Monday the 18th afternoon (2:55p) right now in Hong Kong.  I hope Peter doesn't live on campus and was captured by a big Chinese police raid at dawn.  I wonder if ''[[habeas corpus]]'' requirements are still in effect, because maybe you wouldn't expect a civil disturbance to be still ongoing at dawn. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:55, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
Yes, I am in Hong Kong. No, I am not on the PolyU campus. The police didn't take my "predawn raid" advise. A large group of students surrendered Monday morning, saying that food on campus was about to run out. There are just a few holdouts at this point.
  
I would like to continue a description of the way the ideas, which were picked up and are used by the hysterical today, were introduced. I hope we can be of help <s>today</s> in the current developments, even if it's just verbally in an article, and the source of the progress of them to show where the forward pressure is directed. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 13:43, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Today, the High Court ruled that Carrie Lam's ban on masks is unconstitutional. The police haven't been enforcing the law much up to this point. But they came down hard on a kid who was standing right next to me. I don't think he was doing anything suspicious aside from wearing a mask. We were both waiting for the light to change. Twelve officers, one with an AR-15, ran up from behind, grabbed him, and knocked him against the wall. This was right next to a police station, so the arrest was a pretty convenient one from their point of view. I guess they need to make some mask arrests before the law expires. Meanwhile, the city is in chaos with bricks and barricades blocking the major streets. Everyone is a protester. I saw a pretty girl in a nice dress kicking bricks into the street. Did she ask the shop attendant, "Which color do you think goes best with vandalizing a public thruway?" [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:58, 18 November 2019 (EST)
  
:RobS, why didn't you ''tell'' me Nancy Pelosi intimated Bill Barr ''might'' have perjured himself after he wouldn't show up to Congress to explain why he wouldn't start a second investigation into Trump on obstruction and debate it on the merits? That's not news?!  Those 20 pages Mueller wrote in ''Mueller Report Volume II'' dedicated to defending his interpretation of statute: 18 U.S.C. § 1512 subsection (c)(2) were ''already'' bloody epic, and his legal perspectives were sure to prevail!  I disavow Bill Barr!  I disavow!  I also relinquish and renounce! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 00:27, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
In response to Jpatt's point about why there were comparatively few protests in 1997: It was already too late and it would have looked like colonial nostalgia. Hong Kongers should have been on the streets demanding democracy back in 1978-1984 when the Joint Declaration was being negotiated. At that time, the city's business leaders were cowed by the 13-year-mortgage issue and a currency crash. Hong Kongers with money were the only ones the British listened to. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:34, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Shortly before 1997 the US (I think UK and dominions, too) passed a special immigration asylum bill for Hong Kongers, mostly police and law enforcement, to come to the US and elsewhere. They were virtually guaranteed jobs and to continue their careers as cops and investigators. The fear was they would be the first targeted for arrest and reprisal. The CCP had no problem with this, cause they could re-staff law enforcement and the criminal justice system with their own cronies without much public attention. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:36, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
[promoted by VM] I joined the cleanup crew this morning on Nathan Road. After yesterday's day of rage, the entire road was covered with debris. We picked up bricks and tiles left by the protesters. It was a proud moment when the first taxi made it through and the driver gave us a thumbs up and a heartfelt ''hǎode'' (good). [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:19, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Is it true the trains and subways pick up and depart every two minutes? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:51, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
[promoted by VM] The stations in my area have been closed for the last few days. The protesters have a grudge against the subway provider that is complicated to explain. Hey, MTR doesn't rig the elections, attack the campuses, or try to extradite anyone. In normal times, the Hong Kong system is a wonder to behold. The announcements are given in English, Chinese, and Cantonese (the local language in Hong Kong). I don't necessarily understand them any better than I did the "English" language announcements in New York City. But they have an app that tells you what you need to know, including when the next the train is coming. The train to the airport leaves every ten minutes and the one to Disneyland is every five minutes. Just to take a subway line at random, the Island Line is every four minutes. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:46, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Wow. When I hear white people from Hong Kong speak English, it's almost like a second language for them. You notice that too? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:45, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::You mean white people who consider themselves Hong Kongers? I didn't realize this was a thing. Han Suyin wrote books about the agony of being "Eurasian," but you don't hear this word much in modern times. I suspect the government would object and refuse citizenship. Phillip Khan was born and raised in Hong Kong and so was his father. But he is still a Pakistani national as far as the government is concerned. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::The CCP has in recent years partnered with Hollywood to make full feature bilingual films. Most appear to be filmed in Hong Kong. They usually bring one big name Hollywood star, but still need a few white people for speaking lines. It's pretty funny, listening to these white people trying to speak fluent English while trying to hide a Chinese accent. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:24, 19 November 2019 (EST)
  
::"For two years, people denied the electability of @realdonaldtrump and then for two years people denied the election of Donald Trump." – @KellyannePolls [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 02:07, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
===U.S. Senate vote===
:::[[Comey]], [[John Brennan]], [[McCabe]], [[Sally Yates]], [[John Carlin]] and [[Nellie Ohr]] - all white people - are  all going to jail. Maybe [[Clapper]], [[Strzok]] and a dozen other people. That's the story. We're being fed more B.S. race baiting stories again now by the same cabal of hucksters and their media allies that we've been fed for three years already to divert attention. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 02:25, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Thank you for realizing the problem.  We need a grand unified theory of SJW patter including "white nationalism" smears to repel waves of distractions, which sometimes break forth in major ways like at MasterCard.  I've identified two large clusters:  The freaks who can't ''survive'' in social conditions regarded as normal twelve years ago and are able to box the political compass with a free pass to change the rules of whatever political group they like for the alleged purpose of accommodating their sensitivity. And the slackers who will be defined next in a like manner. I've found people on Twitter who have devoted much of their free time identifying these persons and their deceptions on Twitter; because of their selfless efforts, we owe them to make good use and application of their behavioral studies of how some create chaos and avoid interception of their abuse if we possibly can. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 07:38, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
=== Racial demographic/political shifts and the future of white identity politics ===
+
  
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybeLya7G3Gs STUDIES: Whites (not strictly defined) Projected to Become Dominant Supermajority in U.S]
+
The Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act won unanimous approval in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday. With this victory in the Senate, as well as the recent High Court ruling that declared the mask ban unconstitutional, I can report that Hong Kong is a happier city than it was on Monday. After the death of student Chow Tsz-lok on Friday, there were several days of intense protests and protesters adopted the chant, “Hong Kongers, get revenge.” The Senate vote hits the Communists where it hurts far more than any protest action could. It is the first good news the city has had in six months.
*[https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2018/14-december/features/features/interview-with-eric-kaufmann-race-on-a-professor-s-whiteboard Interview with Eric Kaufmann: race on a professor’s whiteboard]
+
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdQaD_RaZ4I Eric Kaufmann on Nationalism, White Identity & Immigration]
+
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCsTBfsdo50 Harvard: Diversity + Proximity = Republican Voters]
+
  
These are excellent resources on future racial demographic/political shifts and the future of white identity politics. I especially like the material by [[Eric Kaufmann]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:53, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
The physical damage from the protests gets repaired surprisingly quickly. My local subway station reopened this morning after being closed for several days on account of protests. The bricks and bamboo poles have already been cleared from Nathan Road. We still have bare spots on the sidewalks where the protesters took the bricks. I guess Hong Kong will have to make do with ugly cement sidewalks from now on. The protesters are gone and the shoppers and hawkers are back. Private car owners are still skittish about entering the Nathan Road combat zone. No doubt they remember those videos of burning hulks that were shown over the weekend. My advice to the protesters is to use the Senate vote as an opportunity to proclaim victory, make their peace with the subway system, and focus their energy on Sunday’s election. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:44, 20 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:You're only saying that because ''you'' have to ride those same subways, politics or no! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 06:01, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::"From Christian hymns to Canto-pop hits, Hong Kong protesters have been expressing their solidarity through song.
  
:I thought you were RobS and was about to tell you "Conservative reads a lot of Eric Kaufmann too!" Thank you for the info. [And for keeping an eye on these ideas.] What I'm getting at, once I get through the sinister word choices, is that "nationalism" is also a dog-whistle for socialists because "national" socialism, and that includes China, is blamed for thwarting ''international'' socialism.
+
::"Lyrics like 'still I am still free/still I am independent/Forever loudly singing my song' embody a movement that shows no signs of slowing down."
  
In order to change the "shields" into "swords" to marshal the politically naive and justify the continuation of political aspects of the group that a liberal might like to make use of, even if conditions had really improved (though perhaps still short of full success) it became helpful to increase the sense of a ''threat'' to do soOver time, this eventually came in the form of the alleged presence of "hate speech" and "hate groups" for the purposes of silencing and then more easily defeating their oppositionThis spread outside the political groups and poisoned conversation in general, introducing animosity between many social groups where time had allowed it to nearly disappear before.
+
::When I am yet unsuccessful at something, I sing sad songs much as they do.  I am the saddest when I singSo are those who hear me.  They are even sadder than I am.
  
It's probably the case that some young conservatives and other non-liberals were able to witness this transformation of liberal defensiveness from beginning to end and found that it offended their sense of fair play in the political contests of persuading others to their points of view as well as in disapproval at the deception.  And so around 2016 a practice on Twitter and Reddit congealed around the idea of ''overloading'' the liberal groups' newly-institutionalized sensitivity to any free speech that was negative about them. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 13:43, 5 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Yeah, right pal. Don't give up your day job, but way to cash in on the misfortune of your fellow citizens caused by the rise of Chinese occupation forces in your homeland. I'm sure your pop song stands astride the two nations on the same level that those forces ''do'', ready and able to face down, by means of bad lyrics and music, exactly the kinds of problems that those forces ''pose''. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 08:14, 26 November 2019 (EST)
:I have not read a lot of [[Eric Kaufmann]] material. I am merely good at doing research and quickly finding material relevant to issues. So it was not hard for me to find information related to various points Kaufmann has made.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:30, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::It's all too true. Hong Kong residents are more likely to use the bus, which the protesters haven't attacked. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:06, 26 November 2019 (EST)
::Vargas. Can't you see? The whole [[Deep State]] effort to overthrow the President and violate American citizen's rights is blowing up in their face. The Democrats' response is (a) to [[demonize]] Barr, and (b) rally support by playing the [[race card]] and changing the subject. I'm not buying it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:50, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::All I see is that this thread is in utter shambles after inviting you two to ''briefly'' tell me how awesome my new thinkpiece was while I was in the middle of composing it. And if you think I'm starting over now because that wasn't a good idea, you can forget it.
+
:
+
:::Conservative, I apologize.  Your awesome Eric Kaufmann statistics became so seared in my memory they crowded out everything else.  I remember this guy ''by name'' on three to four different occasions in your tremendous recent dissertations/tutorials-slapbacks if necessary directed at Ace ''et. al.'' on the ["]skeptic["] outlook as it stands in 2019, which is saying something.
+
:
+
:::RobS Yes and where there's explosions, there's cowards like me to hit the sidelines and foreswear any connection to whatever conservative is taking the heat, however feckless the Democrats' efforts at any kind of recovery of a silver lining on the effort that ended up so frustratingly unfruitful may be, because they're really just mad at Robert Mueller.
+
:
+
:::These weren't ever really supposed to be "funny" topics, but when your digging a hole for yourself, go with what you know, I guess.  And now I don't know when I'll be able to get back to answering SamHB about Neil DeGrasse Tyson not being a conservative.  And I don't envy my task tomorrow to figure out how to segué back to dignifying "white nationalism" with the serious look and a steady gaze I started with.
+
:
+
:::As for getting lost in these discussions, sometimes I even get occasionally worried that I'm being listened in on just because of the conservative viewpoint, the socialist attitudes among journalists and the intelligent equipment, but Siri laughed and said not to worry about it. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 03:23, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Stop trying to change the subject to white nationalism. Focus on the coup plot and the globalist attempt to destroy American democracy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 04:45, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::You want to stop the coup plot and globalist actions against America? Do yourself and us a favor and stop calling America's form of government a democracy. We are a Republic, not a Democracy. Want an actual Democracy? Look at France during the French Revolution, whether it be the September Massacres or the Reign of Terror. Look at Athens in Hellenistic Greece, even. In fact, our founding fathers specifically wanted to AVOID a democracy. By stating it as "American democracy", you're only helping the globalists and the Deep State. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:50, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Our elected officials are democratically elected. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:55, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Still doesn't make us a democracy. A real democracy entails mob rule, like with the French Revolution, or, heck, various Communist revolutions (or even Southern Somalia in the episode "Collapse" of SEAL Team on CBS). The founding fathers specifically envisioned us as a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, and in fact, what happened in the French Revolution is precisely why they did NOT want a democracy, that as well as how Athens fell. Sure, thanks to Woodrow Wilson and a certain Constitutional Amendment, we're closer to a democracy, but we still have checks and balances, and thus are NOT a democracy. Even the Communists believed in democracy, as [https://robertwelchuniversity.org/Not%20a%20Shot.pdf Jan Zovak made clear in "Not a Shot was Fired"], heck, Lenin for that matter, and the communists are a big part of the Deep State. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 20:45, 6 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Pokeria, did you see my reading collections [[User:VargasMilan/Mob rule in democracy]]?  That seems to be topic of interest here at Conservapedia, and you might like them. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 08:06, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::I've yet to do it in full, but I've gotten a start. You might want to also add in excerpts from "Not a Shot is Fired", and maybe also Lenin's "What Must be Done", since they also spoke glowingly of democracy in a manner that can only be best described as "mob rule" in favor of Communism and Socialism. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 08:14, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Have you noticed, since a certain Amendment got passed, we don't have any short, bald, fat guys get elected president? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:34, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Ha-ha, you mean like the future Joe Biden?  You're going to end up eating your words; dashing Beto is holding Hillary-sized crowds, and women are throwing themselves at electable Biden, saying he can rub their necks anytime! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 08:11, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Commie agit-prop. It's gonna be a Harris/Buttigieg ticket, the first LGBT ticket, top and bottom. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:52, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Personally, I don't think most Americans are onboard with the Democrats plan for ending abortion by making everybody gay. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:59, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Breitbart reported that one of the main perpetrators of the "White Nationalist" smears, fake news CNN, announced yesterday that they have been holding job buyout offerings to employees that have laid off a hundred people. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 09:45, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Colorado shooter -- anti-Christian Democrat ==
+
=== The Chinese Communist Party will lose power. Hong Kong will be great again ===
  
The Colorado shooter apparently was a registered Democrat who praised Obama, criticized Trump, and mocked Christians for believing that homosexuality is a sinful practice: [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/08/report-colorado-school-shooter-allegedly-a-registered-democrat-praised-obama/ 1],[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/colorado-shooting-suspect-denounced-all-these-christians-who-hate-gays 2],[https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/32248-one-denver-school-shooter-post-anti-christian-anti-trump-messages-the-other-think-s-she-was-a-boy 3] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 15:21, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
+
The Chinese Communist Party will lose power. Hong Kong will be great again. See: [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2019/09/21/the_coming_crisis_of_chinas_one-party_regime_486934.html The Coming Crisis of China’s One-Party Regime]. [[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 04:58, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:The popular vote in Sunday's district council election was 57 percent for the pro-democracy parties, 42 percent for the pro-Beijing parties. Voter turnout was Hong Kong's best ever. It was through the roof compared to any previous district council election. It was also higher than any legislative council election, although the legislature has far greater powers than the district councils do. The pro-democracy parties won 86 percent of the contested seats and control of 17 out of the city's 18 districts. Before the election, every district was controlled by the DAB or by another pro-Beijing party. Next up on Hong Kong's political calendar is the election for a legislature scheduled for September 2020. Historically, the pro-democracy parties have done better there than in the district councils. The legislature will write rules for the 2021 chief executive election. Hopefully, these rules will be more democratic than the ones used last time around. Former Financial Secretary John Tsang and protester ''wunderkind'' Joshua Wong are the men to watch. Tsang was private secretary for Chris Patton, the last British governor. Wong is a protester favorite, but Beijing has made it clear that he is beyond the pale.<br/>Looking over the official results, what struck me was, how is it possible that 42 percent of the vote went to pro-Beijing candidates? I never met any pro-Beijing Hong Kongers and none of my Hong Kong friends think this number is plausible. I went around Hong Kong on election day and saw no evidence of any support for Chief Executive Carrie Lam's sorry crew. Every poster and every volunteer I saw promoted a reformer. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:32, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
===Students refuse to be useful idiots for gun control===
+
=== Why are we supporting these protests? ===
Many students walked out of a "vigil" (aka. gun control rally) when its speakers began advocating for far-left agenda items. This caused at least one group (Brady Campaign, which shows how politicized this event was in the first place) to apologize: [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/colorado-students-flip-the-script-by-saying-they-dont-want-to-be-used-to-push-gun-control 1],[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/9/students-walk-out-vigil-after-speakers-turn-event-/ 2],[https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/09/students-walk-out-school-shooting-vigil-turns-gun-control-rally/ 3] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:02, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Serious question for the conservative hive mind ==
+
I'm very iffy about supporting these protests. They started over an extradition bill, which has now been withdrawn. The original goal has been achieved. So why are they escalating now? I personally believe Deep State elements are encouraging the protesters to make progressively heavier demands, in hopes that it will spark an armed conflict that will ultimately drag in the US. They want regime change in China as soon as possible not because the current regime is communist, but because it's challenging the current unipolar world order.  
[[File:Leaks.png|right|350px|thumb|Illegal leaks by career [[civil service system]] employees and [[Democrat]]s spiked during the [[Deep State coup]] attempt against [[President Trump]].]]
+
What's the story with Senate Intel's subpoena for Junior? It seems completely at odds with current White House / GOP tactics. Cheers, [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:09, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:In case it isn't obvious to you yet (despite a ton of different stories in the past three -- and more -- years showing this) at least half of the GOP's officials oppose and/or are working against President Trump and his conservative agenda. We've seen this with ObamaCare, the border crisis, opposing certain conservative nominees, Republican politicians' support for mass amnesty and low-wage migrant workers, etc. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:12, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Such an approach to China is not only selfish, it is also extremely dangerous. We're doing this at a time where enough fentanyl to kill everybody in the country is being brought into the US from China. I believe these illegal exports are being done in hopes that the fentanyl could be used as a WMD against our citizens, perhaps by a terrorist cell that takes orders from Beijing. Now is literally the worst time to be poking the hornet's nest. We need to avoid taking measures that could start a war, all the while rooting out this fentanyl trade and the terrorist cells they are going to (if they exist). Failure to do so could literally mean the end of this nation.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 17:22, 2 December 2019 (EST)
::I get that a good chunk of GOP senators despise Trump, but they've generally been so passive / transactional in their dealings with him, that I'm struggling with the idea of this as a deliberate grenade. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:30, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::They're only passive in the pages of ''The New York Times'', CNN, and other MSM/left-wing sites. The only reason why they aren't waging outright war against Trump is because they know he has a >90% approval rating among Republican voters (think primary elections). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:40, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::This deserves consideration: ''"[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/05/08/senate-intel-committee-subpoenas-donald-trump-jr/ there’s something a little, well, ‘off’ about how the story is being presented…. zero official verification. Without any verification, and with only vague references to anonymous sourcing, CTH would advise to wait-and-see on this one.  DJT-jr has been used more than once for leak hunting.]"''
+
::::[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/05/black-hat-hunting/ Here are] [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/15/too-deep-to-drain-aspects-lost-in-the-james-wolfe-pleading/ several examples] of [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/03/yesterday-brian-ross-today-ali-watkins-new-york-times-moves-reporter-2-out-of-washington-dc/ fake news leak hunting]. The [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/23/indicted-senate-staffer-james-wolfe-leaked-a-2017-copy-of-full-fisa-warrant-against-carter-page-to-reporter-ali-watkins/ Senate Intel Committee director of security was indicted for leaking Carter Pages' FISA app].  [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/02/hogwash-brian-ross-didnt-resign-over-the-fake-news-flynn-story-he-resigned-because-he-was-reporter-4-within-james-wolfe-indictment-senate-intelligence-leak-investigation/ Brian Ross was fired from ABC]. Ali Watkins was reassigned at the NYT. Inspector Horowitz found a culture of leaking under Comey at the FBI. Barr and Wray have both testified about ongoing leak investigations, of which there is a record number. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 02:58, 10 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Brexit/Trump were the first major splashes of ice cold water upon the faces of globalists/liberals/leftists. In terms of the stages of grief, globalists/liberals/leftists are still in the denial/anger stages. Once the European Union breaks up, globalists/ liberals/leftists will go into the bargaining stage of grief. Then once the religious right begin to have very significant power, as the scholar [[Eric Kaufmann]] predicts will happen by 2050 or as early as 2021, liberals/leftists/globalists will go into depression (some already have. See: [[Secular leftists and psychogenic illness]]). And remember, the pace of events will quicken as time progresses (see: [[Acceleration of 21st century desecularization]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:54, 10 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==Framing Barr==
+
:Honestly, I just want Communism to be deader than a doornail, so I'm backing the protestors for that reason alone (I could care less if the current unipolar world order collapses as a result of China's Communist party's collapse, and if anything, I'd probably welcome it if it destroys Communism once and for all.). I'm NOT supporting democracy for China, however. Actually, I see democracy as being absolutely no different from Communism and Socialism (and I don't mean that in a good way, obviously), thanks largely to the French Revolution. Once the Communists are destroyed, I'm making sure that in its place is a Christian theocracy, a Catholic Christian theocracy at that. Jesus (heck, his father, in fact) wanted an Empire in God the father's name after all. Why else would he tell his followers to spread the gospel to the four corners of the world? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:46, 2 December 2019 (EST)
 +
::What is Hong Kong protesting about? The protesters have been making their "five demands" for some time. See "[https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/13/asia/hong-kong-airport-protest-explained-hnk-intl/index.html Why Hong Kong is protesting: Their five demands listed]." It's not Hong Kongers who picked this fight. They were satisfied with the "high degree of autonomy" and "one country, two systems" that they had back in 2014. In the last few years, Beijing has started rigging the city's election system, kidnapping people who publish books critical of Beijing, and threatening extradition. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:22, 2 December 2019 (EST)
  
The Attorney General has offered to let Democrats view a version of the Mueller Report that is 98.5% unredacted
+
==Barr==
 +
Pretty funny guy. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeMwdtbPR6g Watch the 2 minutes beginning at 18:00]. Toward the end he get's int the Resistance pretty good, too. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 07:56, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
The only redactions are ones that are required by law
+
==Bolton's back==
 +
And he's trashing Trump on social media. He has accused the President of attempting to silence him by suppressing his private Twitter account.[https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197946364669370368] At this point, it's apparent that he's gone full #NeverTrump and (probably) supports impeachment. Time to get the popcorn as more of his (Bolton’s) former allies turn on him, like they should've done a long time ago. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 15:20, 22 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:B.S. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:08, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:If Fiona Hill is going to immigrate to the United States and get job with the State Department, the least she could do is learn to speak English. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:29, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::I'm very happy that Bolton has gone #NeverTrump. Neoconservatism must be totally discredited. If Bolton can make tha