Fav quotes

[Travis Retriever]

From Shane Killian's video comments here:
[yt]xsWgEqXfUXA[/yt]

"To +Bo Deanicus (who posted in a way I couldn't reply directly to for some strange reason; stupid Google):

It's the statists who rule with greed, as their state lets them gain money earned by other people while protecting "too big to fail" corporations and bailing out the losers at the expense of people who were actually sensible with their money.

Really, I've never understood why people who simply want to keep the money they earn and do business in a peaceful and voluntary way are greedy and the people who want to use force to take that money and inhibit that business are altrustic. Makes no sense.

In a free market, greed is tempered by loss aversion, and since a free market is voluntary, greed can only be satiated by convincing someone else to give up money by providing something he values even more.

That's why the free market is the only system that can work: instead of shaking a finger at someone for being greedy, and attempting to get in the way of peaceful people engaging in voluntary transactions, you stick them into a positive-sum game and let that greed and selfishness power a globally-prosperous market.

All we need to do is get the priests in Holy Government out of the way."

"This is another thing I've noticed about these discussions: in almost every post, the statist HAS to denigrate the character of the libertarian: he's evil, he's greedy, he's a wannabe rich guy, whereas NONE of the libertarian arguments depend on this kind of character assassination. When we do go after the statist personally it's because of the irrationality of the arguments that he makes, in pretending the state is omnipotent or that laws have the power of magical incantations.

There are times when individuals are insulted for their dishonesty, but it's the dishonesty, not the statism, that's the foundation for these insults. Whereas the statists use nothing more than the fact that the libertarian is a libertarian to call him greedy or whatever, with no other information at hand whatsoever.

But not only is it not necessary to impugn the character of statists to argue for libertarianism, libertarians point out all the time how many if not most of these statist policies are well-intended, just misguided and frought with unintended consequences. Libertarians say that intentions don't matter; only actions and their consequences. Statists just can't seem to stop tying intentions into it, even when there's no reason to do so.

So I ask you: is it REALLY the case that the side who has to attribute bad intentions or character flaws to the other side as a whole, simply on the basis of their being on that side, has the higher Prior Probability?"



To this I would add that sometimes folks like Lord T Hawkeye *will* occasionally call their character into it, e.g. Marx being a PoS (Hawkeye did it better justice than I can), but it's in response to them doing it to us.  If it is a valid argument for them to use against us, it is valid for us to use against them.  It's called expecting a standard of integrity, folks.  If they don't like it, Girlwriteswhat has some big girl panties they can borrow.

[ArtemisVale]

[Travis Retriever]

>>Other anarchists.
Meaning so called 'anarcho' communists, I take it.
Still funny as hell regardless. XD

[Travis Retriever]

In the comments of the following video:
[yt]aUMifHT1AwY[/yt]

"I don't know about anyone else but if I was offered conscription immunity in exchange for my right to vote, I would take it in a heartbeat.
It's not like voting matters anyway."--Lord T Hawkeye.

Same here.   And this is coming from a bisexual male: I never understood all the hoopla over gays/bisexuals being allowed back into the military.
"Yay! Now we can be enslaved by the military industrial complex to die for rich bitter politicians into murdering everyone they don't like AND die for them for no good reason whatsofuckingever!"  Or "Now we can be enslaved and murdered by our own government freely as draftees/human fodder to protect us from the distant possibility of some other foreign government doing it to us! " And I'm like: "Seriously guys, you have Stockholm Syndrome or something?"

[Travis Retriever]

http://www.cracked.com/article_18858_the-biggest-star-wars-plot-hole-explained-by-science.html
All my yes.

[Skm1091]

[yt]IErlI34-0so[/yt]

She forgot one more thing. Mafiosos are HONEST compared to vast majority of politicians

[AnCap Dave]

[yt]oFRqIhzjxBg[/yt]

[Travis Retriever]

"Of course science doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop! But just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale notion most appeals to you." —Dara Ó Briain
From a comment Shane made on a video on Google+.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

So, Sir Morien of the Round Table was black.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/not-all-knights-round-table-were-white-180949361/

[ArtemisVale]

[Ibrahim90]

[yt]lHlztErPVKk[/yt]

[Travis Retriever]

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist."--Lysander Spooner

[Travis Retriever]

[yt]vp8tToFv-bA[/yt]
The first 2-3 minutes alone were just pure win.

She notes that a lot of feminists consider slapping women on the wrists as treating them as children.  Um, what?  Which feminists?  Most of the ones I've seen (and that she's rebutted) pretty much demand treating women like delicate flowers and unique snowflakes, solely to spare their feelz.  So which is it feminists?

[Travis Retriever]

http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_785_16-ridiculous-examples-bureaucracy-in-action/?view=article

[Travis Retriever]

[yt]p25Rz2eP7s8[/yt]

Long, but worth it.