Fail Quotes

[Skm1091]

[yt]JQkdSj6arn0&list=WL14B01B63F6B2BDA3[/yt]

Everything said by Frances Fox Piven & Peter Jay

[Travis Retriever]

Translation:  "I know you are but what am I?"

[Lord T Hawkeye]

No examples provided, guess we just have to take his word on that.

[MrBogosity]

No examples provided, guess we just have to take his word on that.

Yes, because statists are always so honest when they reiterate libertarian arguments.

[tnu]

Quick Robin! Gothem needs us!

[dallen68]

It would have helped to take a picture of the ENTIRE board. You know, so we can actually make sense of what it is we're arguing with.

[Travis Retriever]

It would have helped to take a picture of the ENTIRE board. You know, so we can actually make sense of what it is we're arguing with.

They did.   See the scrollbar at the bottom?

[ArtemisVale]

Anarcho-capitalism: The preference for freedom & prosperity.
NAP: The delusion that you need a doctrine to get the above.
"Anarcho"-communism: The inane belief that involuntary collectivism is anarchy, while free associations are statist. Also that everypony is better off without a price mechanism.-AnCap Applejack

the part about the NAP being fail, the rest is fine.

[Goaticus]

Hey hey! I odn't know how to tie my shoes (I wear crocs) and i'm smarter then this asshole.

Buy a pair of loafers.

[ArtemisVale]

From our mssexysocialist

When the Austro-bots try to criticize libertarian socialism by throwing out the economic calculation problem, they may as well be throwing out the Mormon critique of original sin.
Because that applies about as much to libertarian socialism as the ECP does.

[BlameThe1st]

samcherry in the comments of my Don't Like Guns? bumper sticker:


samcherry: "The purpose of gun control is the protection of people from persons who have an intent to use a weapon. Sandy Hook Elem. must have had no affect on you, because that whole tragedy was the boost to have gun control."


Me: You mean the same incident where 20 elementary school students were killed at a gun-free zone, in a state with the strictest gun laws, and with legally-purchased and registered guns?


samcherry: Stop saying things in such a fashion, because frankly its making me think less of you, and in a way it sounds like you're disrespecting the murdered children and adults. No offense.

Anyways, the gun that was used to murder those children wasn't a handgun, thats the point. I believe automatic weapons should be banned from public use. You people don't understand why the government wants stricter gun control: to prevent people from being killed. If you can't tolerate stricter rules on your little "hobby" (I'm calling it a hobby because all the reasons I can think of for using a deadly weapon is shooting them at a legal place, or self defense) to me thats selfish.


Me: Sorry, hon, but gun control doesn't work. It would be nice if it did work, but it doesn't. So asking for it only makes you look naive.

Great Britain has a higher violent crime rate than we do, even though it has stricter gun laws. Switzerland, on the other hand, has the highest gun ownership rate per capita, and it has extremely low violent crime rates.


samcherry I'm naive!? I'm not, but know I know that you're rude. Way to go.

Europeans have different lifestyles and culture than we do. Its naive just to look at the crime rates and statistics of Europe instead of the South america, Asia, Africa, and Australia as well hon.


Me: Yes, you are naive! If you honestly believe that politicians have our best interests in heart, then you are naive. If you sincerely believe that politicians want to pass gun control in order to decrease gun violence, then yes, you are naive. Something tells me you also believe them when they claim that the war on drugs prevents drug abuse, or the war on terror prevents terrorist attacks, or the war on poverty prevents poverty, all of which have been proven to be bunk. It would be nice to believe that more government intervention would make things better, but sometimes what you want to believe is not the same as what actually is. If you cannot tell the difference, then yes, you are naive. I'm sorry if pointing that out makes me "rude."

And yes, cross-country comparison are fallacious because not every country is the exact same, so comparing one to another is like comparing apples to oranges. This doesn't seem to stop libtards from trying to claim that countries such as Australia and Japan have less violent crime because they also have stricter gun control--even though Australia's neighbor New Zealand also has less violent crime WITHOUT the insane gun laws. Funny how that works out!

[ArtemisVale]

from Ibet-bohm bawerk (i have a feeling its rodolfo)

Now I thought that atheists, being "rational" and "intelligent" "Brights" (Dennet's term) could not POSSIBLY give the pathetic "what caused God?" response to the cosmological argument-a response that betrays any sort of understanding of the argument as made by Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Leibniz, Craig, Feser, etc; a response that is equal to saying in response to evolution "why are there still monkeys?"-in effect, it is astoundingly stupid. I know this is off-topic, but really, it is hilarious that atheism is seen as the "rational" position today when they use drivel like this for arguments.

[MrBogosity]

from Ibet-bohm bawerk (i have a feeling its rodolfo)

Just tooting my own horn here: [yt]AO3oFNsQnRw[/yt]

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

[yt]rs0DeBs2KTA&lc[/yt]

This comment by Stikibits

"You've lost it in your ignorance. Try to remain rational and stop being wantonly ignorant.
Well established science and research isn't wrong, of course.
Look up peer review."

[ArtemisVale]

https://www.facebook.com/SLANCAP

The entire page above is just all fail

I mean...I just...science dammit to natural selection these people are stupid

also this