Fail Quotes

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

You gotta love projection.

[tnu]

[yt]3xOK2aJ-0Js[/yt]

[evensgrey]

[yt]3xOK2aJ-0Js[/yt]

OK, so you cannot make a business out of artificial scarcity when you cannot enforce it, and this means you cannot make a business out of REAL scarcity?

[BlameThe1st]

1) The free market is a market free of government intervention.
2) Corporate subsidies are a form of government intervention.
3) Therefore, corporate subsidies are not the free market.

[BlameThe1st]

You gotta love projection.

Whenever I hear "liberals" brag about their long list of accomplishments, I always reply with this:

[MrBogosity]

Whenever I hear "liberals" brag about their long list of accomplishments, I always reply with this:

Tell them that it was the REPUBLICANS who did most of those things (up through and including the Civil Rights Act) while Democrats were fighting them tooth and nail and watch their heads go asplodey.

[dallen68]

Tell them that it was the REPUBLICANS who did most of those things (up through and including the Civil Rights Act) while Democrats were fighting them tooth and nail and watch their heads go asplodey.

Which isn't really a retort, since at one time the Republican Party was the more liberal of the two parties. Actually, if you take in to consideration the traditional meaning of the word, it still is.

[MrBogosity]

Which isn't really a retort, since at one time the Republican Party was the more liberal of the two parties. Actually, if you take in to consideration the traditional meaning of the word, it still is.

Except if you talk to them they're down with Woodrow Wilson and FDR and all that crowd.

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

Really, Gary?

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

Dear god, my step-dad's mother is a gold mine for fail quotes.

[Dallas Wildman]

Dear god, my step-dad's mother is a gold mine for fail quotes.

Of all the reasons I've heard to complain about Republicans that by far is the dumbest.

[Travis Retriever]

Dear god, my step-dad's mother is a gold mine for fail quotes.

Wow...Never met a pro-choice argument I didn't like...until now...

[MrBogosity]

Jay Kuo (Composer, Lyricist & Playwright) (on Facebook, shared by George Takei):

I've been reading a lot of commentary from people defending the "religious freedom" bills popping up in places like Kansas, Arizona, and Missouri. Their basic argument goes something like this: "These bills protect the right of people to believe what they want to believe. If my belief says I shouldn't serve a couple who has sinned before God, why should the government force me to do so? Isn't that a violation of MY rights?"

But here's the elephant in the room: Everyone knows that these laws are designed to protect Christians from having to deal with people they don't like. The laws appear "neutral" on their face, but make no mistake, they are attempting to grant the majority faith an upper-hand. Businesses owned by non-Christians in these states aren't about to go start slamming doors in heterosexual Christian customers' faces. Gay owned establishments don't have the luxury of denying service to anyone, nor do they ever try to. The true effect of such laws is to give those with power even more of it--so much so, that it essentially codifies the right to discriminate.

Any time a law purports to grant the "same" rights to everyone but in fact is rooted in animus, we should pay close heed. This is no different than laws that once were used to prevent races from intermarrying. On their face, they are "neutral" because they apply to whites and non-whites alike. "No one" had the right to marry someone of another race. But in fact they were meant to keep down minorities and exclude them from "civil" society.

So let's not be fooled simply because laws appear to be neutral on their face. These are designed to punish one group and reward another, plain and simple. Giving "everyone" the right to discriminate really only gives that right to those in control.

https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/posts/929818587047595?notif_t=notify_me

My response:

"Everyone knows that these laws are designed to protect Christians from having to deal with people they don't like." So? We have freedom of association, don't we?

"Businesses owned by non-Christians in these states aren't about to go start slamming doors in heterosexual Christian customers' faces." Which means they'll get more money than their bigoted counterparts. Why would you WANT to give bigots your money?

"Gay owned establishments don't have the luxury of denying service to anyone" Denying service isn't a luxury; it's idiocy. If these bigots want to harm their own businesses, I say, let them!

[Travis Retriever]

Jay Kuo (Composer, Lyricist & Playwright) (on Facebook, shared by George Takei):

https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/posts/929818587047595?notif_t=notify_me

My response:

"Everyone knows that these laws are designed to protect Christians from having to deal with people they don't like." So? We have freedom of association, don't we?

"Businesses owned by non-Christians in these states aren't about to go start slamming doors in heterosexual Christian customers' faces." Which means they'll get more money than their bigoted counterparts. Why would you WANT to give bigots your money?

"Gay owned establishments don't have the luxury of denying service to anyone" Denying service isn't a luxury; it's idiocy. If these bigots want to harm their own businesses, I say, let them!

So aside from earning a cluon from me, I wanted to add regarding that one image talking about 'liberal achievements.'  Even if we accept that "liberals are responsible for these things--the clean air act, etc" there's the fact that they are just more corporatism/more statism, more bullshit that either doesn't help or most of the time hurt.  About the only good thing I recall from that list was the abolition of Jim Crow laws, which, IIRC, was a law set many democrats were indeed in favor of (Dixiecrats anyone?).

[dallen68]

So aside from earning a cluon from me, I wanted to add regarding that one image talking about 'liberal achievements.'  Even if we accept that "liberals are responsible for these things--the clean air act, etc" there's the fact that they are just more corporatism/more statism, more bullshit that either doesn't help or most of the time hurt.  About the only good thing I recall from that list was the abolition of Jim Crow laws, which, IIRC, was a law set many democrats were indeed in favor of (Dixiecrats anyone?).

Well, yes. At that time the democrat party was the more conservative of the two main parties. (Nixon was actually the LIBERAL candidate in his first presidential run, which is the real reason he lost that famous debate, not how he looked on TV, not how he sounded on the radio.) [both of which were fine for the time]

On to the actual reason I'm here:

Gary - you don't need the government to tell you there's gluten in it. Check it out: It's bread, that's made out of wheat, which means it has gluten. Therefore Gary shouldn't eat it. If the bread is made out of something else - possibly something that isn't wheat, rye, or barley - it will say that on the label, with no prompting by the government.