Fail Quotes

[Dallas Wildman]

Notice how communism always gets a free pass from these people despite it killing more than all those he listed combined...very telling, no?



1) Citation needed for the Murray Rothbard quote there fellas.  And even if it's legit, so what?  We don't consider him infallible and he would still be wrong even if it's not being used out of context.

2) Hey, YOU'RE the ones saying if we don't like it we can leave.  Projection much?

I'd also say that the guy on the right doesn't even have to threaten you to dock your pay.  He can simply NOT PAY YOU!  Furthermore what's wrong private actors creating disincentives for littering?  Unless you're saying it's okay to litter on someone's private property.  Double standards much?

Also the Rothbard quote was actually a quote-mine, here's the entire context:
"Take Back the Streets: Crush Criminals. And by this I mean, of course, not "white collar criminals" or "inside traders" but violent street criminals – robbers, muggers, rapists, murderers. Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment, subject of course to liability when they are in error."
Source

In other words, cops should be unleashed against violent felons. 

[Dallas Wildman]

Everything's bigger in Texas, even the idiots:

http://rare.us/story/this-texas-politician-is-trying-to-restrict-people-from-filming-the-police-criminalizing-bloggers/

Looks like Texas got a case of the "No-filming-police law" fever.

[evensgrey]

In the tradition of job postings apparently written by people who's writting ability is limited to copy and paste, I came across this gem (which I've applied for):

http://jobview.monster.ca/GetJob.aspx?JobID=147422727&aid=64922435&uid=100010F0D0B25678BEA68BF8216E75081642F89E3ED129B34F8C1A5D65C7189271A09E5171478F4D57F91A1EB4ED38B97E00E6175D562DF1F3D6B2EE6E2A28BD387A6431FC49B017D6AD886D20673A32AD924F&WT.mc_n=JSAHG10&jvs=e,ar,l,6#

The ideal candidate will be someone with Windows XP-2012 and Linux/Unix Systems Administration experience, strong networking knowledge, exceptional communication skills (written and oral), experience working in the IT outsourcing industry, strong drive & focus, excellent prioritization skills, attention to detail, very reliable and a strong sense of responsibility.

Responsibilities

The ideal candidate will be someone with Windows XP-2012 and Linux/Unix Systems Administration experience, strong networking knowledge, exceptional communication skills (written and oral), experience working in the IT outsourcing industry, strong drive & focus, excellent prioritization skills, attention to detail, very reliable and a strong sense of responsibility.

Yes, I know this is a really discouraging notice, but I've REALLY got to get a job where I don't spend my whole day on my feet, alternating between being in a freezer and sticking my face in the ovens.  (No, really, that's a huge part of my job, going between the freezer and the ovens.  And cleaning the place.  Especially the freezer, since nobody else seems to be bloody-minded enough to actually DO IT in the -30C it usually is in there.)

[BlameThe1st]

http://gawker.com/fight-inequality-abolish-the-senate-1691653655

"Checks and balances? Pfft. That's totes 18th Century, Yo! Ya dig it?" /s

[MrBogosity]

http://gawker.com/fight-inequality-abolish-the-senate-1691653655

"Checks and balances? Pfft. That's totes 18th Century, Yo! Ya dig it?" /s

The US Senate hasn't been any kind of check or balance since 1913 with the passage of the 17th Amendment. What we need to do is repeal the 17th and go back to Senators representing the states, so states won't have funding held hostage anymore if they don't kowtow to what the Feds want.

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

Remember, they're not Jack Thompson.

[Travis Retriever]

This.  This is one reason people don't like trans folk...

[Travis Retriever]

Stay classy, Tumblr.

[Travis Retriever]

The idea is that since most accusations of rape are true, then the probability should swing towards the accuser. Others in the comments support this, saying it's just Bayesian reasoning.

It isn't.

Remember that the Likelihood Ratio is the probability of seeing the observed effect if the hypothesis were true, divided by the probability of seeing the same effect if the hypothesis were false.

Hypothesis: This guy raped the accuser.

Observation: The accuser says he raped her.

Numerator: Every time a guilty rapist is brought into court, the accuser says he's guilty. Therefore, p(D|H)=1.

Denominator: Every time an innocent person falsely accused of rape is brought into court, the accuser says he's guilty. Therefore, p(D|H')=1.

So the Likelihood Ratio is p(D|H)/p(D|H') = 1/1 = 1.

WHICH TELLS YOU FUCKING NOTHING!!!

EVERY person brought into court accused of rape has someone accusing him of committing the rape--if there weren't, HE WOULDN'T BE IN COURT!!!

Now while it may seem intuitive that the low percentage of false rape accusations is relevant, IT ISN'T. And that's the great thing about Bayesian reasoning: it helps avoid these fallacies.

Posted this in the video's comment section.  I'll be surprised if she doesn't just block me.

[MrBogosity]

This.  This is one reason people don't like trans folk...

I'm sorry, I just don't see the big deal there. Why should I care if a woman "calls" herself a man and uses the same restroom as me? Why should a woman care if a man "calls" himself a woman and uses the same restroom?

(Of course, I've always been flabbergasted at gender-segregated restrooms to begin with, so maybe I'm the weird one here...that seems to happen a lot...)

[MrBogosity]

Stay classy, Tumblr.

Funny how I always see this claim more from the SJWs, from the "teach men not to rape" crowd to the "we can't let women go topless" crowd.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

I'm sorry, I just don't see the big deal there. Why should I care if a woman "calls" herself a man and uses the same restroom as me? Why should a woman care if a man "calls" himself a woman and uses the same restroom?

(Of course, I've always been flabbergasted at gender-segregated restrooms to begin with, so maybe I'm the weird one here...that seems to happen a lot...)

Fear men are going to peek at women or some other nonsense.  Apparently they didnt' get the memo that men view going to the bathroom as nothing more than an unwanted but unavoidable interruption in their lives that they just want over as quickly and without incident as possible.  There's a reason why urinal chat is considered a cardinal sin among men.

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

[Travis Retriever]

I'm sorry, I just don't see the big deal there. Why should I care if a woman "calls" herself a man and uses the same restroom as me? Why should a woman care if a man "calls" himself a woman and uses the same restroom?

(Of course, I've always been flabbergasted at gender-segregated restrooms to begin with, so maybe I'm the weird one here...that seems to happen a lot...)

If it's not that big a deal to begin with, why do they even need to use the other bathroom in the first place?  And because in the picture it struck me as more of the "shut up and just believe!" that is so common among SJW circles.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

So if the government confiscated everything you had, you'd be completely free?

Not to mention what republican ever actually substantially cut taxes AND proportionally cut spending?  (cause if you don't do the latter, you're just defferring the payment to the next generation)