User talk:TK

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>

• Archive #1
• Archive #2
• Archive #3
• Archive #4
• Archive #5
• Archive #6
• Archive #7
• User_talk:TK/vandalism

---

Conservapedia Discussion Group - Visit this group!

---

People want to know

if your arse breaks out in boils if you tell the truth. Naturally, I don't expect you to answer that. You haven't got the balls.

Because other than a medical reason, there's no other explanation why you seem to lie compulsively. Although that said, I must applaud you on your latest efforts to dumb down CP. You twisted other people's word better than Bugler ever could, and despite two admins disagreeing with your stance, you went ahead with it anyway, then covered your arse to make sure nobody can call you on your deceit. Bravo, Sir, Bravo. Although that still makes you a lying sack of shit. --PsygremlinZungumza! 17:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Why are you letting Ken push you around?

So, TK, why haven't you dealt with Ken for moving cp:Social_effects_of_the_theory_of_evolution back from Essay space after you had said "This is not an article, but rather an essay, so more properly belongs in the Essay name space. Still. Once again. Always."? I can only assume you don't want to upset somebody who is a more senior admin than you. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You are correct. Compromise is the key to any collaborative project. Once again you show just how prescient you are, SR. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 23:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This from someone who bans JDWPianist for a difference of opinion? Shut up, fuck face. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 23:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

No, no. I think it's good that TK is prepared to admit that somebody who takes 20 edits to make a one paragraph addition to CP is better than he is. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Liberal double standard

"Hollywood values are deadly." "Brittany Murphy, 32, motion picture film actress died of cardiac arrest from combining prescription drugs"
"The Los Angeles County coroner's office said actress Brittany Murphy's death was caused by pneumonia, and that prescription drug intoxication was also a factor."
It would be very "liberal" of you not to remove this, as it's obvious that "Hollywood values" had nothing to do with her death. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Please, you don't expect the truth to take precedent over a little bit of mudslinging do you? Besides, it would involve TK telling the truth, and we know that doesn't ever happen. --PsygremlinParlez! 18:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Giggles

Thanks for the giggles re: NZ on the mainpage. You do realise that NZ has lower crime, lower unemployment, better education etc etc than the US right? You'd be better off here TK, for a start - NZ is gay friendly so you'd fit right in. Aceⁱ⁹ 19:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Your own posts here on RW, Ace, prove the claims about Kiwi education are somewhat embellished, what?. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 23:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter how good an education system you have - if someone's not listening they ain't gonna learn. Aceⁱ⁹ 23:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, coming from the homeschooling advocate. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Coming from a guy who acts as a goon squad for a Yale/Princeton grad who doesn't believe in evolution or relativity. A little education is a dangerous thing. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Crundy, liberals and conservatives, both in the U.S. and the U.K., have found many advantages to home schooling, for a variety of reasons. That said, I don't think I have stated a preference for home schooling, although I have had both in my days. Mine was provided by the school district I was in, actually. Theory, the "goon squad" here, in full HCM, isn't any more appealing to users, IMO. Ace, rightly said! We all have our self-imposed blind spots, I reckon. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 00:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Bahahaha your comments on NZ on the main page are stunningly ignorant. Aceⁱ⁹ 03:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I demand this be posted to CP

Now, monkey! --Irrational Atheist (talk) 02:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

~Yawn~. Ronald Reagan made the same argument back in 1969, and liberals roundly condemned his proposals. I'm glad to see such ideas have now become "ground breaking"! --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 03:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Mutant!

Did you actually read the article you cited? Aceⁱ⁹ 04:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record

You should really watch videos before you crow about them. John Stewart was talking about how Fox is the most bias news network and his quote of "they're the most passionate and have the clearest narrative" was not, repeat not, a compliment. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 22:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

First, I did watch the entire interview, on live television (satellite of course, in real time) and then again on the Fox site. Second, you put your spin on what he said and I will just state the facts, the words he spoke. Perhaps your abilities to discern what he really meant, to get inside his mind, are greater than the average persons, SirChuck. Take pity on the rest of us! --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 22:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok TK, I missed your boyish sarcasm when you know you're against the facts... Direct quote, from the transcript which can be found here:

O'REILLY: Now, are you shocked that a Democratic poll operation shows that Fox News is the most trusted news operation...

STEWART: No.

O'REILLY: In the country?

STEWART: No.

O'REILLY: Forty-nine percent of Americans trust us.

STEWART: No, I'm not shocked at that. Are you shocked that an Internet poll said I was the most trusted newscaster in America?

O'REILLY: Yes, but that was like Blinky did it. This was a big, big, big concern. And somebody told me off the record that you were one of the 49 percent, you believe Fox News is the most trusted news organization.

STEWART: I am. Here's what I believe. Fox News is the most passionate and sells the clearest narrative of any news organization, if that's how — are you still referring to it in that manner?

O'REILLY: Yes, it's a news organization. Right. That's how the poll referred to it.

STEWART: No, I'm sure it did.

O'REILLY: Nobody had any problem. Only you. Only you have a problem.

STEWART: I think Fox, in and of yourself, say you're not a news organization all day. Isn't it now your news — what was it your news from 9 to 11, and then your opinion and then your news again from like 1 to 2:30?

O'REILLY: It's kind of like a newspaper. You've got news pages...

STEWART: Except on Jewish holidays and then you're not, and then on alternate parking days, you're news, but then Christmas you're not?

O'REILLY: OK. Think about the news pages, and then you open another page, and there is the opinion page. Clearly labeled, opinion page.

STEWART: Yes.

O'REILLY: You have no problem with that, right?

STEWART: First of all, newspapers are a passive piece of paper that you go to, and you know where the opinion thing is. Television doesn't function that way, and you know it.

O'REILLY: You don't think people know "The Factor" is an opinion show? You don't think they know that?

STEWART: It's not — certainly not clearly labeled. I've looked at your promos. You're part of the fair and balanced part. You're part of the most trusted name in news.

You still wanna pick this fight douchebag? SirChuckB^{One of those deceitful Liberals Schlafly warned you about} 22:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

He's teasing you. -- =w= 22:49, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

you talking to me or TK? if it's to me, I know, thank you Mei. But since Jinx _{hi Jinx!} left, I haven't had time to bait any conservatives... Except for my sock ventures into CP. SirChuckB^{I have very poor judgement} 22:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Then go forth with my blessing. -- =w= 22:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Mei. Allow me to put this where the douchebag in waiting can't delete it. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 22:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

'Mei is a hater'

I don't hate anyone. All is well. -- =w= 23:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Air Force Wiccans?

So much for supporting the troops, eh, TK? RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor (talk) 05:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

As usual, your logic escapes me, but I have no doubt you have some trolling reason to ask such a nonseq, CUR. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 05:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, it strikes me that if these men and women are willing to lay down their lives for their country--and for a Constitution that ostensibly guarantees freedom of religion for all citizens, their simple desire for a place at which to practice their religion should supercede what you think is a "proper" set of spiritual practices for them. Now, I admit, it's not like they've recently risked taking a bullet for the First Lady or something, but still, it's a fairly simple request given the massive commitment they've made to you and your country. And I'm decidedly not CUR--it's probably well past his bedtime. RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor (talk) 05:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

@TK, the way you write just makes me angry. TKEtoolshed^{Frag Out!} 05:13, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess I somehow mistook you for CUR, with the UR part of your name, and also the silly idea that one deal has anything to do with the other. I never voiced opposition to those witches....I think it was Jpatt. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 05:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Seriously, you read this site too much if you know how CUR is given you weren't a "contributor" at the time. - π 05:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I never voiced opposition to those witches. Really? : "We are a Christian nation. Tolerance of others forms of worship does not require or obligate us to grant parity with tax dollars to every cult in the world. People arguing otherwise in this thread are taking matters to ridiculous extremes. So long as we are not actively stopping someone from praying to other (false) gods, we have fulfilled our obligation, IMO. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:27, 2 February 2010 (EST). RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor (talk) 05:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes...what has that to do with supporting our troops in military operations? Do you somehow think American taxpayers should be on the hook for providing places of worship to every fringe sect, or even major religions? I don't. Again, what you are talking about has nothing to do with supporting troops. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 05:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Because our troops are supported when you don't designate what faith they should have, or tell them that they can fight for the country, just not have the rights that are guaranteed to them? If money can be spent for Christian worship, they can be spent for any recognized religious worship. Period. Because someone or several people don't like spending their tax dollars on something doesn't mean it shouldn't be supported. Otherwise we wouldn't have Congress, a military or aid to foreign nations, simply because there are many people who don't like those. But, and here's what you and your idiot CP buddies don't get, once your tax dollars are collected, you no longer have a say in how that money gets spent. You choose representatives to make those decisions for you. If you don't like it, change the people you vote for, get out others to vote like you. Logic like this just bounces off the ignorant, like yourself. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 06:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

You, sir are a pompous troll. I ask you politely not to post your inane rants here again, or I shall start doing the same on your page. You, the defender of the American Way! What a freakin' laugh! --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 06:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have to comment: TK calling someone else "pompous" and a "troll". Splutter! ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 06:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

^{— Unsigned, by: TK / talk / contribs}

You know, if we just slap {{troll}} on every conversation with TK, we might as well just ban him for life.... Lets take the Jinx _{hi Jinx!} route and have fun winding his crank. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 07:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Archiving

Hi - I changed the old parameter in the Pibot archiving template for this site from 2 days to a more realistic 7 days: Otherwise it would seem that you are trying to automatically dodge questions like:

• So, what's not deceitful on oversighting this File:Talk-Global Positioning System - Conservapedia 1264634820907.png? FvC (talk) 01:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome -- larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, jerkoff, I can dodge any questions I want. Where are your archives? As for your question above, I learned the oversighting trick from here. Fuck yourself. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 09:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)