Fail Quotes

[MrBogosity]

this whole "Black Skin Curse" goes back to the entire Kane and Abel incident. When Kane killed his brother, the "curse of black skin" was put upon him. Not as an entire curse, but as a reminder to his sinful actions, and his whole race would be punished for it.

The Bible simply says that God put a mark on Cain and his descendants. It says nothing whatsoever about what that mark was, and there is no textual reason to think the mark was making Cain black.

NO ONE in the 1900's considered blacks a part of the human race.

[I'm assuming he means 1800s.]

The Quakers did. So did Thomas Jefferson, Lysander Spooner, William Lloyd Garrison, Charles Darwin, Francis Collins...I can keep going.

[AnCap Dave]

The Bible simply says that God put a mark on Cain and his descendants. It says nothing whatsoever about what that mark was, and there is no textual reason to think the mark was making Cain black.

[I'm assuming he means 1800s.]

The Quakers did. So did Thomas Jefferson, Lysander Spooner, William Lloyd Garrison, Charles Darwin, Francis Collins...I can keep going.

The fact is, the dude is just trying to save face because he doesn't want to believe that his precious beliefs are racist.

[Ibrahim90]

The fact is, the dude is just trying to save face because he doesn't want to believe that his precious beliefs are racist.

can't see how, as IIRC, they didn't let blacks enter that faith till the 1970's (so I've been told).

EDIT: oh, wait, the guy in the video said the same thing.

[Goaticus]

Anyone who uses this hilarious crappy bit of conspiritard tripe http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2247692/ to suggest that we have to vote Romney or else Obama will end free elections. Something that they can't explain why Romney is somehow less of a risk despite his night of the long knives crap at the GOP convention.

Personally if a President is planning on ending Democracy and installing himself as dictator I figure it will happen in their first term.

[Altimadark]

What the **** am I doing, still wasting time on YouTube comments? *sigh*

Anyway, today it's the comments made by antonkowalski on this video:

[yt]SKnNB02dVgA[/yt]

Most of it is just him regurgitating the communist manifesto, but there are a few highlights:

Personal property is part of your person and includes property from which you have the right to exclude others. Private property is a social relationship, not a relationship between person and thing.

So by your logic, if you own a house and use it just for you and your family, it's personal property, but if you rent out a room (social relationship), it's suddenly private property.

It amazes me how you refuse to distinguish between corporatism and the free market (one requires govt intervention, the other is antithetical to it), yet somehow you can distinguish between private and personal property (both rely on voluntary transactions).

There is nothing to add. That is right. That's why we need to socialize private property to give it to people who need it as personal property.

Capitalism always depends on the government. Always funny to see you rightwing fake-libertarians denying this fact.

I'm an Anarchist. You may want to inform yourself about Spanish Anarchism. That's my side.

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

What the **** am I doing, still wasting time on YouTube comments? *sigh*

Anyway, today it's the comments made by antonkowalski on this video:

[yt]SKnNB02dVgA[/yt]

Most of it is just him regurgitating the communist manifesto, but there are a few highlights:

"socialize private property"
I'm sorry! WHAT!

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

[yt]PhV9aZOqmz8[/yt]
Good thing we have Nick Gillespie.

"Who gives a shit about a couple of dead paki's? When they get off their asses and take care of their own terrorism problem then we'll stop doing it for them. There are civilian causalities as a result of any military action. A couple of dead paki's are a very small price to pay considering the alternative. Which is to ignore the problem and allow Al Qaeda to take over the country and get their hands on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal."

Am I the only one who thinks Neo cons are a bit heartless?

[AnCap Dave]

"Who gives a shit about a couple of dead paki's? When they get off their asses and take care of their own terrorism problem then we'll stop doing it for them. There are civilian causalities as a result of any military action. A couple of dead paki's are a very small price to pay considering the alternative. Which is to ignore the problem and allow Al Qaeda to take over the country and get their hands on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal."

Am I the only one who thinks Neo cons are a bit heartless?

Nope. Any reason is a good reason to blow shit up to these people.

[AnCap Dave]

[yt]2bQ5UE-E0t4[/yt]

UGH!

Liberal Logic: Anything that isn't blessing our holy king Obama is automatically slander, blackmail, and the work of the devil!

Seriously, how the fuck can you take "If my taxes go up, I might have to reduce the size of my company" as "IF YOU VOTE FOR OBAMA I WILL PERSONALLY MAKE SURE YOU NEVER WORK IN THIS TOWN AGAIN GOD DAMMIT!?"

The spin here is just unbelievable.

[Altimadark]

"socialize private property"
I'm sorry! WHAT!

Yeah, and that's not even the big fail. The big fail is when he also claims to be an anarchist.

I'm an Anarchist. You may want to inform yourself about Spanish Anarchism. That's my side.

[Virgil0211]

Friend posted this on their wall. Decided to throw in a comment of my own. Things went downhill from that point. I'll just leave the transcript of the conversation here.

ME: Considering how dissimilar they are, I look forward to this 'zombie socialism' we'll inevitably get.
18 hours ago • Like

HIM::  Republicans voting the same way in lockstep. What do you think?
18 hours ago • Like

ME:  Republicans and Democrats you mean? I don't see the asses behaving too differently from the oliphants.
18 hours ago • Like

HIM:  Republican intransigence makes compromise impossible. Therefore, gridlock.
18 hours ago • Like

ME:  Obama's made records for amount of legislation passed, had two years of a filibuster-proof majority in the senate and majority in the house, still has a majority in the senate, and has only vetoed two bills. Yeah, that's a real story of a hijacked legislature there.
18 hours ago • Like

HIM:  That's the conservative lie speaking. Obama only had a filibuster-proof majority for 133 days. George Bush never issued a veto when the Republicans controlled Congress. If Congress ever passed anything, Obama might have something to veto.

I have 13 years of Washington experience, including gathering and analyzing energy data for the Reagan and Bush I administrations. You apparently believe Fox News. That is ill advised.
17 hours ago • Like

ME:  http://www.justpurefact.com/id10.html

Oh, really? Congress never passed anything?

Why don't you actually do research before beating your chest and trying to insult anyone who disagrees with you. And while you're at it, return the taxpayer money apparently wasted on your research career if the best you can do is say "You watch faux news! Trollolololol!"

Btw, I prefer the Daily Show.

JustPureFact
www.justpurefact.com
Unbiased voting records, just the facts period
17 hours ago • Like • Remove Preview

HIM:  Fuck off. I know far more about this than you ever will.
17 hours ago • Like

ME:  Then put your money where your mouth is. PROVE IT.
17 hours ago • Like

ME:  And for the record, I probably hate Romney more than you do.
17 hours ago • Like


HIM:  The fact that you post no information about yourself tells me a lot. I don't hate Romney, just the idea that he might be President. I do know he was so unpopular by the end of his single term as governor of Massachusetts, he didn't dare run for re-election.

My office was a block from the White House, and I used to socialize with people from the White House, Capitol Hill, and the bureaucracy. As a reporter, I have interviewed everyone from presidential candidates to selectmen. I wrote the nation's coal production report for several years. I have partied with U.S. Senators. I have even been a lobbyist on occasion.

So, yes, I know a whole lot more about this than you ever will. You could learn something, but I see from your timeline you fully buy into Obama hate, so that's not likely.
17 hours ago • Edited • Like

ME:  "The fact that you post no information about yourself tells me a lot."

Actually, by definition, it tells you nothing. By the way, you might want to look up this fallacy -

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html

" I don't hate Romney, just the idea that he might be President. "

Then I probably hate the possibility that he might be President more than you do.

"I do know he was so unpopular by the end of his single term as governor of Massachusetts, he didn't dare run for re-election."

Or maybe that he was more intent on getting a presidential nomination?

"My office was a block from the White House, and I used to socialize with people from the White House, Capitol Hill, and the bureaucracy. As a reporter, I have interviewed everyone from presidential candidates to selectmen. I wrote the nation's coal production report for several years. I have partied with U.S. Senators. I have even been a lobbyist on occasion."

And we meet logical fallacy number 2:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority#Fallacious_appeal_to_authority

I don't care if you hold meetings with god. Either you provide evidence for your claims (as I have done) or you don't. The fact that you haven't done so leaves me (and any logical individual) with no choice but to reject your claims.

"So, yes, I know a whole lot more about this than you ever will."

If that were true, you could prove it.

"You could learn something, but I see from your timeline you fully buy into Obama hate, so that's not likely."

It's a little unsettling when you keep committing the same logical fallacy over and over again. Are you sure you're in a position to be commenting on this topic?

Argumentum Ad Hominem
philosophy.lander.edu
The argument concerning the attack of a person's character or circumstances is...
See More
16 hours ago • Like • Remove Preview

HIM:  Sorry, Marmaduke, I haven't attacked your character yet. But the fact that you post no personal information of any kind tells me you have a touch of paranoia and definitely something to hide. The hallmark, incidentally, of conservative thinking.
2 hours ago • Like

ME:  Either your comments were meant as an insult (in which case, you were attacking my character) or you meant to imply that they had something to do with the validity of my argument. So which one is it? Did you insult me, or did you use bad logic? (You ARE aware of the difference, right?)

By the way, you have yet to cite anything in support of your argument. Your last several comments have consisted of little apart from insults and chest-beating. Do you have anything more to contribute, or are you just trying to save face?

(While you're at it,take a good look at my avatar and the entire contents of my page BEFORE you try to brand me as a conservative. Could you also do everyone a favor and post a peer-reviewed source for this claim: "(...) a touch of paranoia and definitely something to hide. The hallmark, incidentally, of conservative thinking"?)

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

Comment section full of fail.

[yt]a9GftrRJXkE[/yt]

[AnCap Dave]

This tripe basically spews the nonsensical "have to vote for the lesser of two evils" nonsense.

[AnCap Dave]

Gotta love Obamatons that choose to make this a race issue.

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

Gotta love Obamatons that choose to make this a race issue.

Its not like Obama chose to extend the Patriot Act or sign the NDAA.

Oh. Wait. That's exactly what happened!