Lol conservatives have there own version of wikipedia.

hayesc0

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
38,507
Reputation
8,353
Daps
118,861
It can always be worse as they say... lol
Whats really funny when just looking at articles in general they spend more time trying to discredit people then display actual facts.
Lol just read some of President Obamas page its got me :deadmanny: from the hate on it.

Barack Hussein Obama - Conservapedia
 

hayesc0

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
38,507
Reputation
8,353
Daps
118,861

Stay trying to claim Dr. King lol.
Political affiliation
Time and time again, liberals claim that MLK was a Democrat. Liberals point to the people he associated with or that he opposed Barry Goldwater as proof that MLK was a Democrat. There is considerable evidence that he was not a Democrat. Martin Luther King Sr. was a Republican, that would almost certainly make his son a Republican. Only after his son was arrested did King Sr. plead to President Kennedy for his safe release. It is noted at that point MLK Sr. switched parties to support Kennedy. This despite Kennedy voting against the 1957 Civil Rights Act and being initially opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King. The March on Washington was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. In addition, Robert Kennedy allowed the FBI to wiretap MLK Jr's phone on a trial basis due to suspicion that Dr. King's associates wereCommunist; this was later expanded during Lyndon B. Johnson's presidency; which undermined King.[11][12]

It was the Republicans who led the way to free the slaves nearly one-hundred years earlier, that fact was not lost on his generation. Frances Rice, chairman of the National Black Republican Association said, [he] "absolutely was a Republican," and "We were all Republicans in those days. The Democrats were training fire hoses on us, siccing dogs on us."[13] In the 1960s, King would have witnessed the Democrat parties position on pro-segregation, against the Civil Rights Act. King was most likely aware of high profile Democrats such as Al Gore Sr. and Robert Byrd voting against repealing segregation. Southern Democrats rallied around Jim Crow laws and Black Codes which were targeted against King's message. Dixiecrats blocked the social and political progress of black Southerners for decades. Was King unaware? Doubtful. It was Republican President Eisenhower who began the push for integrating all white schools and the desegregation of the military. To think King was a witness to all the upheaval Democrats caused and then became a champion of Democrats is a stretch.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
93,484
Reputation
3,905
Daps
166,776
Reppin
Brooklyn

hayesc0

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
38,507
Reputation
8,353
Daps
118,861
On obamas 2000 congressional election.

In 2000, Obama lost his only political election when he chose to run against experienced incumbent and former Black Panther and Bobby L. Rush for the U.S. Congress in a 65% black district. Rush's name recognition began at 90%, Obama's at 11%. Michelle Obama opposed taking on an such an iconic figure dear to the community and threatened divorce.
 

Tate

Kae☭ernick Loyalist
Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
4,274
Reputation
795
Daps
15,042
Jesse Helms - Conservapedia

Like most conservative politicians who eschew political correctness, Helms was frequently the target of mainstream media bias, despite his former career in the media.[2] Helms was a staunch advocate for equality under law, but due to his Southern background and incorrect party affiliation, his positions were misrepresented through typically biased reporting.[3] However, Helms opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[4]Helms also opposed extending the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Reagan called Helms a "lionhearted leader of a great and growing army."[5]

In the Senate, the bill faced opposition lead by Senators Jesse Helms and John P. East. Helms read "Martin Luther King Jr.: Political Activities and Associations" on October 3, 1983, and presented Congress with a three hundred page document detailing King's communist connections.

:sas2:
 

hayesc0

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
38,507
Reputation
8,353
Daps
118,861
Global Warming article :russ:

The global warming theory is the liberal hoax[2] that the world is becoming dangerously warmer due to the emission of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Liberals have used the theory of man-made global warming to seek rationing by government of life-saving energy production and consumption.

The most accurate data—from satellites—confirms that there has been virtually no global warming since 1998.[3]The media insist otherwise by publicizing local variations in unscientific surface thermometers,[4] when the more scientific atmospheric temperature does not show such an increase.[5] Moreover, natural periods of global warming and global cooling are expected to occur regardless of human activity, and not long ago liberals were demanding more government control to combat an alleged cooling in temperatures, with some scientists warning of a possible ice age.[6] Global cooling, a theory that predates global warming, obviously occurs naturally many times throughout Earth's geological history.[7] The ease of refutation of anthropogenic global cooling claims foretells the eventual fate of the current global warming hysteria.
 

Robbie3000

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
32,709
Reputation
6,510
Daps
145,676
Reppin
NULL
"The liberal claptrap that helped elect Obama as president seems silly today. It was claimed, for example, that Obama has millions of followers on Twitter, when allegedly some 70% of them are fake.[5] And although the lamestream media promoted Obama as a great orator, in fact he relies almost entirely on teleprompters for his speeches and press conferences, and at one point even had teleprompters set up for him in a middle school classroom in order to speak to the media."
 

hayesc0

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
38,507
Reputation
8,353
Daps
118,861
:deadmanny::deadrose::dead:


Age of the Earth


The historical and scientific evidence strongly indicates that theearth is approximately 6,000 years old.[note 1]
See also Counterexamples to an Old Earth.

The Age of the Earth has been a matter of interest to humans for millennia. All verifiable evidence indicates that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. Yet with circular reasoning and implausible assumptions, liberals insist that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 109 ± 1%).[1][2][3]

Old Earth advocates rely on one flawed assumption to the exclusion of other evidence, similar to how an investigator may mistakenly rely on one faulty eyewitness's opinion to the exclusion of all else. In fact, eyewitness testimony is proven to be less reliable to than other indicators, just as the assumption by Old Earth proponents that the rate of radioactive decay has always been constant is flawed. In fact, the rate of radioactive decay would inevitably slow down as the universe cools.

Moreover, a large number of physical processes, such as neutron capture and fluctuations in solar radiation, affect the rate of radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust and render radioactive dating measurements unreliable, depending upon the specific methods used.[4]

Much scientific evidence points to a young age of the earth and the universe and the biblical creation organization Creation Ministries International published articles entitled 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe and How old is the earth? which summarize some of the evidence for a young age of the earth.
 
Top