Ken DeMyer lacks machismo!!

/Rant on

Yes folks, you read it here first (or maybe not!). However, I wish to go on record that Ken DeMyer aka Conservative aka Ruylopez aka David Jensen aka any number of aliases (more of them can be found here) lacks MACHISMO! Now, before we carry on, maybe we should have a look at what Ken thinks is a good example of machismo. You’ll have to look here, because in true CP-style, the original post has been deleted and oversighted. I guess even Andrew Schlafly gets embarrassed by Ken’s drivel at times.

John Hinckley Jr. was certainly crazy, but at least John Hinckley Jr. (I love how Ken appears to have never heard of pronouns!)  had more machismo [than Richard Dawkins] and was obsessed with a woman.

Wait a minute… Ken sees somebody who a) was deranged, b) stalked Jodie Foster and c) shot Saint Ronnie as possessing machismo! Suddenly, I start to see why the right-wing in America shun Conservapedia. It’s because stuff like this is too crazy for even Beck and Coulter.

Now you might be asking yourself why I claim that the author of the seminal “Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?” lacks machismo himself, given that he is clearly an expert on what constitutes machismo and what doesn’t? let’s have a look at some of Ken’s wonderful, flowing prose:

Right now, Hispanic ladies are quite troublesome to Señor Dawkins. Hispanic women constantly kick sand in Señor Dawkins’ face when he goes to the beach because they are quite upset with Mr. Dawkins. The Hispanic ladies see the tough talking and outspoken Dawkins before the friendly liberal press, but Señor Dawkins avoids at all cost debating strong debaters from the opposition. So unfortunately for Señor Dawkins, he is a weak atheist showman who cannot enjoy a day at the beach.

Now are these the writings of somebody who is even vaguely sane? Never mind those of an administrator on Conservapedia, the so-called (or self-titled rather) bastion of conservative thought on the net? But it is not because of these insane ramblings that I’m saying that he lacks machismo. It’s because the man is a coward. A craven cur with a yellow streak wider than the Yangtze River. A mental midget, with the debating skills of a newt. He is possessed of a liver that even the most lily-livered of chickens would disown.

Now these are fairly substantial accusations. Why do make them?

Well, remember we are dealing with a person – possibly of limited mental capacity – who makes ridiculous and unfounded claims, safely behind the walls of Fortress Conservapedia. His recent emissions (I’m sorry, I can’t think of a better word… maybe diarrhoea?) have been ridiculous attacks on Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers. Ken can’t seem to get his around the fact that the chances of a biologist writing about the evils of Stalin are fairly remote. Plus, Ken DeMyer knows full well that he can never be challenged on his ridiculous assertions – not to mention his quote-mined abortions of articles – because he cowers behind a screen of blocking rights, oversight and fellow hand-picked sysop goons. And of course, on Conservapedia, if there’s no record of it, it never happened.

However, Ken did venture boldly forth, signing up as Ruylopez (he must have a Hispanic fetish. Must be all those smooth, tanned boys, with those sexy-sexy Gomez Addams moustaches)  on the wannabe Christian encyclopaedia A Storehouse of Knowledge, initially so he could link-spam all his articles (Homosexuality, Atheism and Evolution) back to CP. However, there were two problems with this plan.

Firstly, ASoK is run by a former Conservapede admin, called Philip Rayment, who doesn’t have much of that ol’ Christian lovin’ for CP or its goons, so Ken’s link-spamming efforts soon came to an end. Secondly, little cowardly Ken suddenly found himself out in the big, bad world, with no ban-hammer, no oversight and no Terry Koeckritz to cover his ass (well, we think that’s all he does with Ken’s ass. However, given Ken’s obsession with homosexuality, one has to wonder).

Ken suddenly found himself having to answer some very pointed questions about his writings. How did this embarrassment to the conservative cause react? Maturely? With a flash of machismo to silence his critics. Or like the whiny little bitch he is? Let’s look at some examples of his replies:

  • I quickly glanced and saw that you made a post to my talk page. I hope you did not have your hopes up as far as me reading it because that is not going to happen.
  • I hope you did not hope that I would read you latest post because that is not happening either
  • Trent, if your wiki is so successful then why is it that I no intention of looking at any material you write. (This is especially precious, given Ken’s many, many “Dear Gentlemen” shouts from inside CP. Although these have stopped now, probably because Terry got firm with him, and Ken’s still panting like a bitch on heat. Not to mention the fact that he stole Rationalwiki’s tumbleweed animation, for his “essay”. Just a little tip, girly-boy. Essays tend to have more than just a picture. Now, I know that all the books you read have really big pictures and very few words, but this is an encyclopaedia you’re apparently running).
  • I am not reading any further communications from Rationalwikians so it is pointless to try to communicate through this channel. (True, because you can’t block and delete any comments you don’t like.)
  • Gentlemen, I see by the yellow banner that I got a message. By the way, I did not read your recent postings.

So, for somebody who’s ignoring his detractors, he seems to spend an awful lot of time responding to them.

Ken DeMyer, you are a coward and an intellectual nobody. You are an immature child playing in a very big pool, and just because EVERYBODY (not just the Hispanic ladies) is kicking sand and water in your face, doesn’t mean you can take your ball and run whimpering like a cur that’s just been given a good kicking back to the warmth of Terry Koeckritz’s arms. If you had any machismo, you’d stand up to your detractors. But that’s beyond your mental faculties.

Godspeed, you sad, pathetic little man.

/Rant off

About PsyGremlin

PsyGremlin is a former Conservapedia sysop (although the position was earned nefariously), stand up comedian, DJ, and is currently a self-employed financial adviser, who impersonates a responsible adult at least 5 days a week. However, highlighting and poking fun at the crazies out there remains his first love. Well besides pork crackling. And custard. And cricket.
This entry was posted in Administrators, Conservapedia, Ken Demyer and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Ken DeMyer lacks machismo!!

  1. Pi says:

    His passive aggressive attacks on more successful bloggers is the worst, he actually thinks they will be dumb enough to link back to him. I noticed PZ Myer mentioned Ken but gave him no link.

    Ken is a bitch. He will drag debates off topic to a tangential point that he thinks he is strong on rather than answering direct question. He has no intellectual machismo.

  2. Nutty Roux says:

    It’s hard to tell if Ken’s crazy like a fox or just plain crazy. His latest is a MPR post crowing: “A Miami news organization which caters to Spanish Americans covers the machismo news beat and Con servapedia’s essay Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?” Except that it’s not a “Miami News organization” but a scraper set up as a fake news site. The lack of any original content on the site would have been a give away, but we already know he doesn’t read the sources he posts about citing Con Servapedia. The “more than meets the eye” bit ( is another example of him completely missing the point that Con Servapedia is not being cited favorably. I guess any press is good press, especially when it’s not openly calling you a moron.

  3. Norseman says:

    Reminds me so much like ShockofGod and NephilimFree. They apparently have the balls to take on science and Atheism with loaded questions and challenges (of their choosing), but refuse to hear anything of opposing views on their videos. Criticism is removed, posts are monitored, and they make unbelievably weird statements.

    NephilimFree agrees to debate DonExodus2, being very open to where and when. However, he changes his mind constantly, finally narrowing it down to ShockofGod being moderator on his own radiotalk thing. Don doesn’t agree to it, instead doing a different gig at the same time, but invited Neph to join at any time. Long story short, Neph claims victory, Don posts a video showing just how insane Neph is in order to win, and nobody is any smarter.

    Another story involves SmilingSkeptic and ShockofGod. Smiling tries asking NephilimFree to answer some of his questions, and Neph just ignores him outright. Shock intervenes for some reason, challenging Smiling to debate Neph, which is declined. Shock responds by saying he chickened out and will tell the world:

    Conservative fits right in with these people.

    • cpmonitor says:

      I think Conservative is the most ‘out there’ of the CP sysops in censoring, or just plain avoiding having to respond to criticism. But it’s something all the CP sysops are guilty of – hiding behind the ban hammer and oversight.
      What made Ken stick out was firstly his claim to be “very busy and uncertain when he could reply” to the editor who rose to the challenge about nobody finding fault with his articles.
      That was immediately followed by his infantile “I’m not reading your messages na-na-nana-na” stunt on ASoK.
      The man is incapable of intelligent conversation, let alone debate and I think it goes a long towards showing just how nutty Andy and the other sysops are, to allow Ken to carry on with his nonsense. Still, it makes for good copy for us in the end.

Comments are closed.