User:TicTune1

(Difference between revisions)

TicTune is aimed at acknowledging not huge concerts, but rather live performances held at places such as restaurants, bars, clubs, and festivals. Basically places where they arrange a nice little live performance for artists/bands, dancers, and performers alike. We want to concentrate primarily on mostly shows that require little to no admission fee (80%). The remainder (20%) can be fee-based shows. You'll gather the necessary information regarding a show. This information will include pictures and links when available. All information on a show is to be entered into TicTune's database. To learn more about TicTune be sure to visit http://tictune.com/index.php

View the original article here

Statement by NSC Spokesperson Caitlin Hayden on National Security Advisor Tom Donilon’s Meeting with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal

Statement by NSC Spokesperson Caitlin Hayden on National Security Advisor Tom Donilon’s Meeting with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Rural Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Technology Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Violence Prevention Women Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden Being Biden Audio Series First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Take A Virtual Tour

View the Residence, East Wing and West Wing

Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Take a Virtual Tour of the White House Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 17, 2013 Statement by NSC Spokesperson Caitlin Hayden on National Security Advisor Tom Donilon’s Meeting with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal

President Obama joined National Security Advisor Tom Donilon’s meeting today with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal.  The President and Prince Saud Al-Faisal reaffirmed the strong partnership between the United States and Saudi Arabia and discussed developments in the region, including the conflict in Syria.  Prince Saud Al-Faisal offered his condolences for those affected by the attack in Boston.  The President asked Prince Saud Al-Faisal to convey his best wishes to King Abdullah bin Abd Al-Aziz Al Saud.

Blog posts on this issue April 18, 2013 12:29 PM EDTIn the Face of Evil, Boston Has Shown that Americans Will Lift Up What Is Good

President Obama speaks at in interfaith service dedicated to those who were gravely wounded or killed at the Boston Marathon bombing.

April 18, 2013 10:15 AM EDTWatch Live: President Obama Addresses Healing Service in Boston

President Obama will deliver remarks this morning at Healing Our City: An Interfaith Service which is dedicated to those who were gravely wounded or killed in Monday’s bombing near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

April 18, 2013 9:57 AM EDTCourage, Strength, Resilience: Women Fight AIDS

The Kaiser Foundation hosts an event for the launch of EMPOWERED, Alicia Keys' new campaign to help end the HIV/AIDs epidemic.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Rural Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Violence Prevention Women The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Talk:Secular left

(Difference between revisions):::Oh I fully support the idea of free ideas in a public square...but there's a difference between a logical debate and a full on assault. [[User:Ryancsh|Ryancsh] 18:02 9 June 2013:::Oh I fully support the idea of free ideas in a public square...but there's a difference between a logical debate and a full on assault. [[User:Ryancsh|Ryancsh] 18:02 9 June 2013::::A government voucher would eliminate the objection that public schools cannot be eliminated due to poor people. In Belgium, families receive government vouchers which they can use at any school including private religious schools. ::::There is no reason why government schools cannot be privatized and replaced with private schools and homeschooling. Plus, Bible believing Christians and Orthodox Jews have among the highest rates of literacy in the world. In the New England Colonies, their societies were based on the Bible and they had respectable literacy rates. It is not the fault of Christians that atheists have never created a book that is more widely read than the Bible!  ::::There will be more and more privatizing of education in the West and the agnostic Bill Gates says a crisis is coming as far as American funding of public schools.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-agnostic-bill-gates-presents-data.html] Broke European economies will no doubt face the same future situation. Atheism is doomed and global atheism is shrinking! [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/globally-worldviews-of-atheism-and-non.html] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:55, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

Conservative, Atheism and secularism are not the same thing. I would agree that in the secular left there are a good proportion of atheists however I would direct you towards the Atheist vs Secular page in which it does note that there is a difference. Ryancsh 16:33 8 June 2013

I don't see your point in relation to the accuracy of the material I added. Second, I have never seen a case where secularism is neutral. Pro-atheism/materialism philosophy/religious tenets like evolution, etc. are invariable are promoted via so called secularists in the public schools. Atheism is a religion and so is evolution.[1] Evolution is also a religious tenet of the religion of atheism. Michael Ruse, evolutionist science philosopher admitted, “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”[2] Conservative 11:48, 8 June 2013 (EDT) Furthermore, secularists tend to suppress the free speech of Christians in the public square (Valedictorians being asked not to mention Jesus in their speeches, school prayer, etc. ).

Really? because I'm an Atheist yet I do not promote the so called "religious tenet" of evolution. I'm a true Atheist in the original definition of the word: that I see the claim that God exists and I refuse to believe that until I am given credible proof. I do not say that there is no god (that would be an Anti-theist) but simple that I do not believe in one until one is proved. That is the same with evolution (as in the origin of species not the idea that animals change over time, the latter has been proved) because I refuse to accept evolution the origin of speicies until it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.Ryancsh 16:53 8 June 2013

Ryancsh, did macroevolution occur? If so, are you willing to debate VivaYehshua in a debate offer which has repeatedly been given to evolutionists. Frankly, if you claim to believe in macroevolution, I doubt the sincerity of your belief in this religion. In January of 2012, the Journal of Research in Science Teaching published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings. A January 20, 2012 article entitled Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling published by the website Live Science wrote of the research: "They found that intuition had a significant impact on what the students accepted, no matter how much they knew and regardless of their religious beliefs." See: Evolution Conservative 11:59, 8 June 2013 (EDT) I refuse to debate for a side that I do not even stand for. If you want a debate on evolution then contact someone who promotes that. I do not get involved in evolution because I do not side to either side until one starts to gain irrefutable proof. I will debate over the idea that Atheism is a religion, considering the fact that Atheism is simply the rejection of the proposition that there is a god. Anti-Theists are a religion, they are the people that say that there is no God. Atheism is simply this: You say there is a God, I say if you don't prove it I won't believe it.Ryancsh 17:07 8 June 2013

Ryancsh, I am not going to wrangle with someone who is insincere. You purposefully engaged in equivocation.

"...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and creation disproved. The PBS Evolution series and the Scientific American article are full of examples of this fallacy."[3] See: Evolution Conservative 12:12, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

I'm sorry, but what part of my argument is insincere? I am telling you simply That Atheism and Evolution are not synonymous. What about Raelians? There are a type of atheism, in the sense that they don't believe in god) but completely reject the idea of evolution. I think that you need to stop attempting to generalize all Atheists into a single category. We are just as different as any other grouping on earth.Ryancsh 17:19 8 June 2013 I don't believe you are sorry. Not going to wrangle with someone who I believe is an insincere Darwinist poser.[4] Conservative 12:31, 8 June 2013 (EDT) I never said that I was a Darwinist. Like I said, stop with the generalization. That is what I really do not understand about your actions. As a conservative, your main focus should be to attack the left. Communism, Socialism and Liberalism should be the enemy, not me. Considering that you and I more than likely have similar views on social and economic policy I do not understand why you would be so quick to go for my throat. This article proves exactly what I am talking about. You turned something that provided criticism of the left into a full attack upon Atheism. If you want to attack leftist Atheists you will have my full support and I will even join you but deciding to ignore the left to attack someone who is just as conservative as you seems highly illogical to me.Ryancsh 17:41 8 June 2013 Ryancsh, did macroevolution occur or most likely occur? Conservative 13:53, 8 June 2013 (EDT) Ryancsh, for the record, I think that both the secular left and secular right will collapse and that Professor Eric Kaufmann's projections are correct. See: Decline of atheism. Second, the economic liberalism in the Western World is not sustainable and it will either collapse or be pared down. Given the arrogance and stubbornness of many in the post 1960s West which had prosperity for many years, economic collapse is the most likely scenario in my opinion. Will the West and/or the United States bounce back quickly economically? Time will tell. Conservative 14:42, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

I sincerely tried to implement some degree of collaboration with atheists on the talk pages (as per my/our new policy), but the Christianity/atheism culture war appears to still largely be a zero sum game. It is hard to collaborate with those who lack candor and have very different wishes for the future direction of Western society/world. Atheism will largely lose this culture war though attrition and other factors.[5] Conservative 15:39, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

Ryancsh, a few other things. The University of Cambridge material was historically correct in its assertions. Second, if you were for public schools being sold off and vouchers given instead would could agree on this. And then much of the Christianity vs. atheism culture war would end. And if this happened, atheism would lose a lot of its ideological supply line - state sponsored Darwinist indoctrination. Lastly, there is a correlation between more socialism and/or communism and more atheism existing in a country.[6]. Conservative 00:05, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

1. I am in no position to comment about Evolution. I am not a Darwinist, an Evolutionist or a biologist. Stop attempting to put me into an argument in which I have no place.

2. The closest thing that came to collaboration on your behalf was when you said that you would be willing to collaborate on an Atheism and Politics with me. I sincerely doubt that it is the fault of other Atheists because you have proven to me off this page that you have no interest in collaborating with Atheists no matter how right wing they may be. I still point out that you made an article that criticized the Left into a full assault on Atheism.

3. This talk of a culture war is not a war. It's an attack of Christians who, for some reason or another, seem to not be able to rest until every last Atheist is gone. Atheism, by its very nature, does not work like that. The status-quo argument of "all we want is to be left alone" is actually very applicable here. I might add that it is the will of the Government whether or not schools teach evolution. I also know for a Fact that the Catholic church follows a doctrine of Theist evolution, (as I was brought up in a Catholic/Methodist household) so the idea that without public schools there would be no evolution is farcical.

4. How many times do I have to tell you...Evolution and Atheism are not synonymous. Atheism is the rejection (or denial as you call it) of the belief in a god. That has nothing to do with Evolution. Ryancsh 17:12 9 June 2013

Ryancsh, you say you are an atheist and not an evolutionist. If life and the various kinds of animals/plants did not arise by evolution, how did it happen? What is your third alternative outside of creationism? Little green men? If so, where did the little green men come from? It's either naturalism or supernaturalism and you haven't given me a naturalistic explanation with sound evidence supporting it. Bible Christianity and biblical creationism have a wealth of evidence supporting them as can be seen HERE. Second, if you are not for vouchers which private schooling can access (including private religious schools and/or homeschooling) and/or the elimination of public schools, then I have serious doubts about you being right wing which you claim to be. Without this happening, state sponsored indoctrination into atheistic/deistic postulations of how life and animals/plants arose will continue. Liberal elitist judges will continue to eliminate/distort the process of choice of what is being taught. Third, in a free society with the exchange of ideas and an open public square, atheists will realistically never be hermetically sealed from receiving religious messages outside the religion of atheism. This is the price of freedom. The idea that atheists will "be left alone" is a fantasy and it wasn't even achieved in the Soviet Union which had state sponsored forced atheism.[7] Conservative 12:49, 9 June 2013 (EDT) Atheism does not claim to have an answer for how life originated. All Atheism is is the rejection of your proposition that there is a god. In terms of where life came from: I'm apathetic. Doesn't really affect me one way or another. I'm not here to debate that. Public Schools must be maintained for those who cannot afford private tuition or their parents cannot home-school them. When it comes to the school system in Britain, supporting grammar schools is considered right wing and I am of the category. For the record, I am in favor of Creation being taught alongside evolution should the parents in the school district support that. Elimination of Public schools in Britain is near-impossible so the farthest the ring wing can be is that parents have move say in their local schools in what gets taught and what does not. You are forgetting that there are two very different school systems between Britain and the USA. Oh I fully support the idea of free ideas in a public square...but there's a difference between a logical debate and a full on assault. [[User:Ryancsh|Ryancsh] 18:02 9 June 2013 A government voucher would eliminate the objection that public schools cannot be eliminated due to poor people. In Belgium, families receive government vouchers which they can use at any school including private religious schools. There is no reason why government schools cannot be privatized and replaced with private schools and homeschooling. Plus, Bible believing Christians and Orthodox Jews have among the highest rates of literacy in the world. In the New England Colonies, their societies were based on the Bible and they had respectable literacy rates. It is not the fault of Christians that atheists have never created a book that is more widely read than the Bible! There will be more and more privatizing of education in the West and the agnostic Bill Gates says a crisis is coming as far as American funding of public schools.[8] Broke European economies will no doubt face the same future situation. Atheism is doomed and global atheism is shrinking! [9] Conservative 16:55, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

View the original article here

Hospitals Serving The Uninsured Face Challenge Under Obamacare

Hospitals that treat the most vulnerable patients may have the toughest time weathering spending cuts under President Obama’s health-care law.

Approximately 1,500 hospitals nationwide are known as “safety net” providers because they care for a larger portion of uninsured patients than their competitors.

Under the Affordable Care Act, the safety-net hospitals will gain a new source of revenue when millions of the uninsured gain coverage. At the same time, the law’s spending cuts could prove challenging for hospitals that tend to operate with relatively small profit margins.

“This is a time of uncertainty for them,” said Stu Guterman, vice president of the Commonwealth Fund. “On the one hand, they should be thrilled because a lot of the patients they treat will have payment attached to them. On the other, they’re losing some of the funding they rely on.”

A report released Tuesday by the private consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal warned that the health-care law “may actually worsen the status of many safety net hospitals.”

The Affordable Care Act layers three big spending cuts on top of reductions that states have made during the recession.

First, the law slows the rate of regularly scheduled pay bumps from the federal government, meant to help hospitals keep pace with growing health-care costs.

Safety-net hospitals also will  bear the brunt of cuts in “disproportionate share payments,” money that the federal government sends hospitals that cover a high level of uninsured patients. These payments, which come from the Medicaid and Medicare programs, will fall by more than $30 billion over the next decade.

Health experts initially thought that those funds would become unnecessary as the expanded access to health coverage lessened demand for uncompensated care. After the Supreme Court declared the Medicaid expansion optional, several Republican governors declined to move forward, leaving hospitals worried that they will still see high numbers of uninsured patients.

Last, the health-care law tethers a small portion of hospitals’ Medicare payments to the quality of care they provide and to patient satisfaction rankings. If hospitals don’t hit certain targets, they stand to lose 1 percent of their Medicare income.

Safety-net hospitals, separate research suggests, may have a tough time hitting the goals, because they tend to receive lower patient satisfaction ratings than competitors who treat fewer uninsured people.

“The challenge for a lot of these institutions are that they rely heavily on federal subsidies,” study author David Gruber said. “Now it’s like a tsunami of cuts hitting at the same time.”

Researchers who have studied the safety-net hospitals echo some of the report’s concerns but note that the health law offers many benefits for these providers.

“What the Affordable Care Act really means for the hospitals is going to vary,” said Teresa Coughlin, a health policy researcher at the Urban Institute. “It will depend on whether their states take the Medicaid expansion, how many people are left uninsured, and what happens with state and local funding.”

Coughlin recently published a study looking at how five large safety-net systems were  adapting to the health-care law. Some, she said, are building new facilities and putting a new focus on quality, so they can compete for the patients who do gain coverage under the health law.

“It’s not all doom and gloom,” Coughlin said.

The Obama administration has responded to some of the hospitals’ concerns. In the president’s budget released last week, the White House proposed delaying some of the cuts in disproportionate share payments by one year, as states continue to debate the Medicaid expansion.

Still, safety-net hospitals remain concerned over what lies ahead under the health law.

“It’s a more challenging environment when you have all these issues colliding at once,” said John Haupert, president of Grady Health System.

The Atlanta-based hospital system estimates that 30 percent of its patients lack insurance coverage and an additional 30 percent receive Medicaid, which tends to pay lower rates than private health plans.

When Grady ran the numbers, it found that it would lose $45 million annually under the health law’s Medicaid cuts to disproportionate share payments. That works out to be about 7 percent of the hospital’s $670 million budget. If those cuts go through, Haupert said, he has thought about cutting back on some of the clinical services the hospital system provides. However, many of its uninsured patients will become eligible for coverage next year.

“Clearly we’re faced with lots of decisions,” Haupert said. “We’ve done some brainstorming. None of it will be an easy decision.”

View the original article here

Weekly Address: Sandy Hook Victim’s Mother Calls for Commonsense Gun Responsibility Reforms

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Remarks of Francine Wheeler
The President’s Weekly Address

Hi. As you’ve probably noticed, I’m not the President. I’m just a citizen. And as a citizen, I’m here at the White House today because I want to make a difference and I hope you will join me.

My name is Francine Wheeler. My husband David is with me. We live in Sandy Hook, Connecticut.

David and I have two sons. Our older son Nate, soon to be 10 years old, is a fourth grader at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Our younger son, Ben, age six, was murdered in his first-grade classroom on December 14th, exactly 4 months ago this weekend.

David and I lost our beloved son, but Nate lost his best friend. On what turned out to be the last morning of his life, Ben told me, quite out of the blue, “ I still want to be an architect, Mama, but I also want to be a paleontologist, because that’s what Nate is going to be and I want to do everything Nate does.”

Ben’s love of fun and his excitement at the wonders of life were unmatched His boundless energy kept him running across the soccer field long after the game was over. He couldn’t wait to get to school every morning. He sang with perfect pitch and had just played at his third piano recital. Irrepressibly bright and spirited, Ben experienced life at full tilt.

Until that morning. 20 of our children, and 6 of our educators – gone. Out of the blue.

I’ve heard people say that the tidal wave of anguish our country felt on 12/14 has receded. But not for us. To us, it feels as if it happened just yesterday. And in the four months since we lost our loved ones, thousands of other Americans have died at the end of a gun. Thousands of other families across the United States are also drowning in our grief.

Please help us do something before our tragedy becomes your tragedy.

Sometimes, I close my eyes and all I can remember is that awful day waiting at the Sandy Hook Volunteer Firehouse for the boy who would never come home – the same firehouse that was home to Ben’s Tiger Scout Den 6. But other times, I feel Ben’s presence filling me with courage for what I have to do – for him and all the others taken from us so violently and too soon. 

We have to convince the Senate to come together and pass commonsense gun responsibility reforms that will make our communities safer and prevent more tragedies like the one we never thought would happen to us.

When I packed for Washington on Monday, it looked like the Senate might not act at all. Then, after the President spoke in Hartford, and a dozen of us met with Senators to share our stories, more than two-thirds of the Senate voted to move forward. 

But that’s only the start. They haven’t yet passed any bills that will help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. And a lot of people are fighting to make sure they never do.

Now is the time to act. Please join us. You can talk to your Senator, too. Or visit WhiteHouse.gov to find out how you can join the President and get involved.

Help this be the moment when real change begins. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

President Obama makes a statement about the explosions at the Boston Marathon.

Understand how and where your tax dollars are being spent.

President Obama sends a message to the White House email list to explain why he asked Francine Wheeler to deliver the Weekly Address.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

User talk:Aschlafly

(Difference between revisions)::In any event, I think there should be a full discussion on the talk page, and, revisiting this issue, I think that what would probably be best (and what I will therefore request) is for the page protection to automatically expire, say, a week or two from now, and hopefully, the discussion that takes place during this next week will improve the article.  Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 13:10, 9 June 2013 (EDT)::In any event, I think there should be a full discussion on the talk page, and, revisiting this issue, I think that what would probably be best (and what I will therefore request) is for the page protection to automatically expire, say, a week or two from now, and hopefully, the discussion that takes place during this next week will improve the article.  Thanks, [[User:GregG|GregG]] 13:10, 9 June 2013 (EDT)::'''EDIT''' You wrote "politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does ''[sic]'' this frequently."  I trust you are familiar with [http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/rules/apprpc.htm#x3dot3 Rule 3.3 of the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct].  [[User:GregG|GregG]] 13:23, 9 June 2013 (EDT)::'''EDIT''' You wrote "politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does ''[sic]'' this frequently."  I trust you are familiar with [http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/rules/apprpc.htm#x3dot3 Rule 3.3 of the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct].  [[User:GregG|GregG]] 13:23, 9 June 2013 (EDT)$wgGroupPermissions['*'            ]['createpage'] = false;$wgGroupPermissions['user'        ]['createpage'] = false;$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createpage'] = true;$wgAutoConfirmAge = 600 ; # Ten Minutes

Comment here

Hi! Thank for for creating this website.

Archive Index

if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); }

I was a little bit disappointed that Pentecost didn't make the Main Page, even after I had mentioned it: see Talk:Main_Page#Pentecost....

I'd like to see the Christian Feasts being honored on the Main Page, be it by a masterpiece, a link to an article, etc.: the next will be Trinity Sunday. Any ideas?

Thanks, --AugustO 08:42, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Good suggestions. Often this will depend on what else is in the news, or what other entries editors are spending their time on at a particularly moment. Other websites on the internet are purely religious sites.--Andy Schlafly 10:48, 21 May 2013 (EDT)

Mr. Schlafly,
I wanted to apologize if my past edit offended you or damaged the project. It was never my intent to remove information from the table, but only to enhance the layout and supplement the content through additional citations. I have also apologized on the talk page of the article, but I thought I owed you a direct apology as well.

Additionally, I still have a desire to improve the article. I have posted a proposed plan on the talk page, and I would be very grateful for your input. I eagerly await your suggestions.

Sincerely, WilliamWB 11:27, 23 May 2013 (EDT)

Andrew Schlafly, you claimed that „Jesus prayed, often publicly, for people”. I'm still interested in an example for this - as you said that this happened often, you should be able to provide us with one. To be more precise: I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks ( e?????? - like in Matthew 14:19) or laying hands upon someone (?p?t???µ? ?e??a? - like in Matthew 19:15), I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (p??se???µa?) publicly for people.

Could you please give us a verse? Thank you. --AugustO 15:40, 24 May 2013 (EDT)

For example, Jesus routinely prayed in public before each meal.--Andy Schlafly 21:32, 24 May 2013 (EDT) „I don't want examples of Jesus blessing or giving thanks” „I'd like to see an example of Jesus praying (p??se???µa?) publicly for people” „Could you please give us a verse?” As you can see, your answer doesn't match the question. --AugustO 22:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT) Try John 8-14 (Translated)#11:41 - when Jesus very publicly prays to and thanks God prior to raising Lazarus from the dead.--Andy Schlafly 23:45, 24 May 2013 (EDT) I wonder if he'd be satisfied with John 17:11-17: Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. [1] Perhaps there aren't as many transcripts of our Lord's specific prayers as we'd all like. --Ed Poor Talk 19:46, 26 May 2013 (EDT)

I may be a "liberal" Christian but I am devout, but some articles (guess by who?) suggest I am more associated with Satan them I am Jesus. I will not stand for it any longer--Patmac 09:34, 26 May 2013 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

Can you please unprotect this page? I would like to update it with information about VY and Shock's chatroom that has come to light at Talk:Main Page. If this is not desirable, then I would suggest unprotecting the page (which is currently sourced only to a single page on an anonymous blog) so that a more verifiable article can be written in its place (and perhaps if I can get a hold of Conservative, he can point me to reliable sources). Thanks, GregG 21:28, 31 May 2013 (EDT)

Can you do anything with this: Template:Dead link? --JoeyJ 14:02, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

What is wrong with it?--Andy Schlafly 16:20, 1 June 2013 (EDT) Maybe you can expand it. In Wikipedia there is a category for articles with dead links --JoeyJ 09:00, 2 June 2013 (EDT) I've done it. If Mr. Schlafly or someone else wants to change the exact name of the category, they can go ahead. Onward 09:25, 2 June 2013 (EDT)

Could you restore my talk page, actually? A nice little memento from the hoopla. :) Onward 20:24, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

Conservative still goes on with his hatred, I will get blocked for this but here is my promise, I will wait 3 days and if after that time this users hatred is not completely removed from this site I am going to report Conservapedia to the Southern Poverty Law Center and request it is designated a hate group.--Patmac 11:28, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

I would have preferred to send these messages to you in person but I cannot find an email for you so it has to be done here, I have requested you do something before but have been constantly ignored. Lets face it Andy, despite not holding office you are very much a politician, and what does a politician do when a subordinate constantly jeopardizes his position? He gits rid.--Patmac 11:41, 3 June 2013 (EDT) Conservapedia supports and defends the full right to free speech, and urges liberal groups to do likewise.--Andy Schlafly 12:16, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is not free speech, this is hate speech. When i read that Jesus eats and spits out moderate Christians that is hate speech, and it also brings the name of our saviour into disrepute. He does not just attack evolutionists and atheists, he attacks Christians, to the extent that we are not Christians at all. "Liberal" Christianity and marital infidelity, "Liberal" Christianity and whore mongering, "Liberal" Christianity and bestiality, need i say more? But if someone dare challenge his position, he blocks them, how is that free speech? I think you personally have some pretty strange ideas but you do allow them to be challenged without going on a hate spree, and you are to be respected for that. But constantly allowing Conservative to post his vile tirade, however free it may be, just undermines Conservatives and by extension your image.--Patmac 12:32, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This user Pacmac is blocked indefinitely. Apparently, he thinks he can define what hatred is, even so far as to saying that the above reference concerning Jesus constitutes "hate speech". This is the place in the Bible where it comes from, Revelation, Chapter 2: 14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. What it means is that this user is trying his best to stop any mention of the Bible unless this mention is done in accordance with his liberal philosophy; which means that the above Revelation verses are null and void. He further threatens to call the SPLC on us if we don't behave in according to his whims, i.e. one hate filled individual calling a hate-filled organization to complain about our alleged hate against his own hate-filled ideas. Patmac had also forgotten about our First Amendment RIGHTS to FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, and FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE. He's so filled with hate himself that he would demand the SPLC to try to stop us from enjoying those rights. As far as I'm concerned, he failed. And he can continue failing somewhere else. Karajou 13:12, 3 June 2013 (EDT) Firstly, let me say that I do not endorse user:Patmac`s tactics of legal threats. They have no place on a wiki, and should instead be sent to the site's owner (Mr. Schlafly) by email. However, as per hate speech and the Bible, it is clear that the Bible condemns churches who do not uphold the tenets of Christianity, but on the other hand, who is User:C to decide which churches are not upholding these tenets? brenden 13:43, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

This is an opportunity for Andy to show some leadership in setting a path that de-escallates the conflict here. On the one hand, Patmac is absolutely right about the intemperate nature of User:C's comments. On the other hand, Patmac's frustration with the failure to address that problem led him to make intemperate remarks as well. I suggest that we forgive Patmac for his transgression, and address whether User:C's edits are consistent with the fundamental commandments of Conservapedia. This is not a "Free Speech" issue. User:C is free to express his views on his private blog. Our question is whether CP should endorse and republish some sharp comments as the views of the entire project. Wschact 07:22, 4 June 2013 (EDT)

ReymeDneK's contributions? Thanks, GregG 10:15, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

There is a dispute between myself and user:Markman regarding User:Rafael's block. Could you please provide some guidance? Thanks, brenden 15:34, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

See this edit. Clear case of incivility. Considering his previous record I'd say he should be banned for at least a week if not more. I would have given him a lifetime ban but unfortunately there are too many editors with blocking rights who seem to be determined to subvert Conservapedia's rules. Interestingly enough, many of those editors are also in cordial relations with the RW userbase. - Markman 15:42, 6 June 2013 (EDT) You should also point out that, aside from you, the only other person who has given Rafael a block, was DamianJohn, and a now outed parodist. As per "determined to subvert Conservapedia's rules", I would suggest that you re-read the rules. I still haven't forgotten your bullying of AlanE. brenden 15:48, 6 June 2013 (EDT) "You should also point out that, aside from you, the only other person who has given Rafael a block, was DamianJohn, and a now outed parodist." Come on darling, don't be afraid to call the parodist by his name - Dvergne. The same Dvergne who sided with you and with AlanE against me. So you're basically admitting to both associating with a liberal website and with parodists. - Markman 15:54, 6 June 2013 (EDT) As far as I understand, User:Dvergne, Karajou, and myself were chastising you for spamming {{uncited}} specifically on AlanE's contributions. Are you insinuating that Karajou is "associating with a parodist"?? Furthermore, once again, you have shown yourself unwilling to read that userpage, that explains my goals on that website specifically. In case you can't see that website, I have the words reproduced below:

==Wat?== *Why are you here? :I'd rather not be impersonated, and I would like a word in this place. *What are you doing at Conservapedia? :I do enjoy thought exercises. While Conservapedia does go in a little overboard at times, I still have faith in it. I feel that the only reason that Conservapedia's problems are so famous, are because of the inordinate amount of trolls and parodists, trying their best to write something so ridiculous, that their comrades might congratulate them. That, and the continued threats by [[user:naca|certain]] [[user:Umichcynic|people]] [[user:Proxima Centauri|at]] [[Liberapedia|certain websites]], to (blocked by spam filter), and harrass the precarious community at Conservapedia, have not helped the situation. One of my goals there is to rectify that. brenden 16:00, 6 June 2013 (EDT)

Your other edits on that website reveal a different story. Your cordial relations with the RW userbase shows that you're one of them. - Markman 16:04, 6 June 2013 (EDT) In the days of TK your admiting you are even reading that site would have earnt you a ban. Davidspencer 16:05, 6 June 2013 (EDT) On the contrary, I have been called a dick, a parodist, a "smarmy little prefect", among other things. I do my best to present Conservapedia in a positive light, and frankly, are doing a lot more good than Markman, going there to deliberately spread a false impression of a surly, confrontational Conservapedia. brenden 16:06, 6 June 2013 (EDT) I think that I made my case and I don't need to elaborate any further. I don't only enforce the 90/10 rule but also try to comply with it, so I'll refrain from any further replies until Mr. Schlafly says his word. - Markman 16:09, 6 June 2013 (EDT) I think that you shouldn't jump the gun, and instead, should wait for Mr. Schlafly's word on this matter. brenden 16:05, 7 June 2013 (EDT)

A sock of Mr. Mason has recently posted some vile attacks on that page. Although I have undid them, someone may want to block that sock and/or take other remedial measures. Thanks, WilliamWB 12:43, 7 June 2013 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I know you've taken interest in voter ID just as I have, and I found out this week that the Arkansas Secretary of State has proposed rules to implement Arkansas' new voter ID law. [2]. I'm planning on writing up and submitting comments to fix several issues with the rules, and I was wondering whether you were planning on submitting comments or wanted to see what I am writing. Hopefully, if the rules are fixed as I suggest, the voter ID law should survive federal and state court challenges. Thanks, GregG 13:24, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

That's interesting. I wasn't planning on submitting any comments, but I'd be curious to see what you submit. My own view is that voter ID laws are not as significant as early voting laws.--Andy Schlafly 22:36, 8 June 2013 (EDT)

Andy, I think if Conservapedians could spend more time creating content rather than fighting spammers that they would do so if given the opportunity.

Why don't you add the feature to the wiki that fights spammers that Brenden says works great at his wiki?

Here is the informmation:

I noticed that in the RC, there's been a large amount of spammers. Perhaps implementing QuestyCaptcha, a system that uses questions that Mr. Schlafly chooses, could stem the onslaught. It works excellently at my wiki. Here is the information for this extention: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:QuestyCaptcha brenden 21:10, 1 June 2013 (EDT)

I hope this helps. Conservative 10:30, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

User:Conservative reverted my recent edits without explanation and protected the page. Since there is no way to contact U:C and I don't see it likely that there will be fruitful discussion about improving the article about the logical fallacy of quote mining, I would request that the page be unprotected and that U:C work in collegiality with me to improve the page. Thanks, GregG 11:21, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

There is nothing wrong about quoting the other side and using those quotes to disprove and discredit their position. Some evolutionists pretend there is something wrong with this, yet politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does this frequently.--Andy Schlafly 13:00, 9 June 2013 (EDT) I'm glad you are offering your input, and I should probably explain my changes fully on the talk page. Science, law, theology, politics, mathematics, and philosophy are all different systems for answering questions about our world. Each system has its own rules, so what may be a valid argument in law (citing to binding precedent or quoting an authority) is not necessarily valid in science or math. Likewise, logical deduction from axioms is the main way mathematical results are proven, but it has less utility in the other systems of answering questions. In any event, I think there should be a full discussion on the talk page, and, revisiting this issue, I think that what would probably be best (and what I will therefore request) is for the page protection to automatically expire, say, a week or two from now, and hopefully, the discussion that takes place during this next week will improve the article. Thanks, GregG 13:10, 9 June 2013 (EDT) EDIT You wrote "politicians, attorneys, and any debater properly does [sic] this frequently." I trust you are familiar with Rule 3.3 of the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct. GregG 13:23, 9 June 2013 (EDT)

Try this:

$wgGroupPermissions['*' ]['createpage'] = false; $wgGroupPermissions['user' ]['createpage'] = false; $wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createpage'] = true; $wgAutoConfirmAge = 600 ; # Ten Minutes

View the original article here

Uh-Oh! Building ObamaCare’s Health Exchanges Has Already Cost Double the Expected Amount

Credit: WhiteHouse.govHere’s another ominous sign for ObamaCare’s future: The Department of Health and Human Services admitted yesterday that setting up the law has cost twice as much as expected so far. And you can't really blame Republican opposition for the overrun: That’s just accounting for the cost of building exchanges in states that said they want to run them.

Here’s The Hill with the report:

The Health and Human Services Department (HHS) said in budget documents Wednesday that it expects to spend $4.4 billion by the end of this year on grants to help states set up new insurance exchanges. HHS had estimated last year that the grants would cost $2 billion.

The department also is asking Congress for another $1.5 billion to help set up federally run exchanges in states that do not establish their own.

Just because HHS is asking for the money, of course, doesn’t mean it’s going to get it. So if not, then what? The HHS has promised it will, er, do something—something!—to make it all work. But it won’t say what. At least not yet:

HHS Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources Ellen Murray punted Wednesday when asked about the consequences if Congress also denies the new request.

The department is "determined to make them work," she said of the exchanges.

A big chunk of the grant money doled out so far went to California. It has reportedly received $909 million in federal funding to build its exchange. But even with the hefty funding it's not going smoothly. The state's insurance regulators have warned that residents should expect "rate and market disruption" when the state's health insurance exchange opens. 

View the original article here