Conservapedia/YMMV


 * Alternative Character Interpretation: A theory occasionally batted about is that Schlafly himself is the ultimate parodist, having created the site either For the Evulz or to make conservatism look bad without offending his mother (Phyllis Schlafly, naturally). If nothing else, the idea does help your SAN score a lot.
 * Critical Research Failure: One can only feel pity for Schlafly's students. Not just removal of "liberal bias".
 * In the page for Classroom Prayer, they state that it has been proved that classroom prayer would get rid of all of America's problems, like every crime you can think of, schizophrenia, obesity, the national debt, suicide, murder... all but global warming. The source they used was a poll that asked if classroom prayer could lower the crime rate. And if that wasn't bad enough, the majority said no. (26 to 15)
 * Quoting an article from the Daily Mail, Andy claimed that Obama is not going to the Royal Wedding because he was being "rude to the British". However, the article stated that there would be a high security cost to protect the President, not that he was being rude (and frankly, Conservapedia has been far more rude to the British).
 * After The King's Speech won Best Picture, Andy claimed that the reason "no one was hearing about the Oscar winners" was because "conservative King's Speech 'destroyed' liberal The Social Network". He must not have made a simple Google News search, as virtually every major news website reported on the win. In addition, The Social Network was by no means an unsuccessful film, and at the end of the day, it did win a greater percentage of awards it was nominated for than The King's Speech.
 * Also, why is The King's Speech "conservative"?
 * Crowning Moment of Awesome: Depending on your viewpoint, the Lenski dialog. It pretty much serves as the ultimate verbal smackdown of Schlafly.
 * Crowning Moment of Funny:
 * Their page on "conservative values" mentions that one of these values is "emphasizing humility and open-mindedness instead of arrogant certainty about one's own views." This on the very same page that declares "Conservatives are happier than liberals."
 * The beautiful hypocrisy of calling Jon Stewart racist.
 * Everyone Is Jesus in Purgatory: Conservative Bible Project example
 * Fan Dumb: The genuine contributors to the site.
 * Fan Hater: They have a Userbox Template where you can list your weapon of gun choice against "Colbert zombies".
 * High Octane Nightmare Fuel: See "Stealth Parody".
 * The fact that Andy is a teacher should keep you up at night.
 * Also the fact that the troll contributors are completely indistinguishable from the actual ones, even to Schlafly himself - some trolls have managed to go undetected despite making regular significant contributions to the site for years, and a troll getting promoted to sysop/bureaucrat is a semi-common occurrence. In fact, most trolls are only 'discovered' when they decide to leave the site and deliberately out themselves.
 * Hilarious in Hindsight: Andy once claimed that (while he immensely hates soccer) "the reason Americans suck at soccer is because colleges have allowed women to play sports." One year later, the American women's team made second place in the World Cup.
 * No Such Thing as Bad Publicity: After a Massive vandalism spree, Andy proudly boosts the edit count on the main page. And after a week of the site being under a crippling DDoS attack, he boasts that the site had "broken its March record for the number of unique visitors." Also, expect almost any news or blog reference to Conservapedia to get plastered all over the front page, regardless of that the post says about them.
 * So Bad It's Good: If you take it as a joke.
 * Ed Poor as an editor. He always starts pages that are poorly written stubs or descriptions of movies about attractive teenage girls.
 * Conservative's essays. That is all.
 * Snark Bait
 * Unfortunate Implications:
 * Schlafly believes, for instance, that men are inherently smarter than women. He accounts for this this in his lesson plan when teaching, providing female students with less information and giving them easier assignments because he believes they wouldn't be able to handle the full workload of a basic high school-level class.
 * He also supplies female students with shorter tests as a concession to their limited intellects. It's unclear whether he realizes that this could actually make the female students' tests harder, since each question is worth more...