Respected Republican pedophile begs for handouts

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You can support your pedophile all you want, don't lump us in with you while you do so.

You have no basis to claim that Don2 would support a pedophile.

I have no basis to make that claim about Don2, that is true. Underseer is an open and unabashed supporter of his fellow Republican, as shown in this thread where he is spamming the forum in order to raise funds for him.

 

[laughing dog]

You can support your pedophile all you want, don't lump us in with you while you do so.

You have no basis to claim that Don2 would support a pedophile.

I have no basis to make that claim about Don2, that is true. Underseer is an open and unabashed supporter of his fellow Republican, as shown in this thread where he is spamming the forum in order to raise funds for him.

You are using conservolibertarian reasoning to reach your counterfactual claim about Underseer - which is odd, because you are not a conservolibertarian.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I have no basis to make that claim about Don2, that is true. Underseer is an open and unabashed supporter of his fellow Republican, as shown in this thread where he is spamming the forum in order to raise funds for him.

You are using conservolibertarian reasoning to reach your counterfactual claim about Underseer - which is odd, because you are not a conservolibertarian.

I do not know the meaning of that word you are using, but the reasoning I'm using is "looking at what Underseer posts" to determine he is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help a politician he likes by spamming the board with that politician's fundraiser.

 

[laughing dog]

I have no basis to make that claim about Don2, that is true. Underseer is an open and unabashed supporter of his fellow Republican, as shown in this thread where he is spamming the forum in order to raise funds for him.

You are using conservolibertarian reasoning to reach your counterfactual claim about Underseer - which is odd, because you are not a conservolibertarian.

I do not know the meaning of that word you are using, but the reasoning I'm using is "looking at what Underseer posts" to determine he is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help a politician he likes by spamming the board with that politician's fundraiser.

Until you can show an actual chain of reasoning actual posts from Underseer other than to declare a conclusion that is unsubstantiated by fact, it appears you do not understand that word "reasoning".

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Well, how can I break this down enough for you.

In English, there are these things called "words", which have various meanings. Some of them are nouns, which represent a person, place, thing, or idea. Some of them are verbs, which represent an action. Adjectives are commonly used to modify nouns, and adverbs are commonly used to modify verbs. Pronouns are sometimes used in place of a noun in order to facilitate speech. Then there are interjections, used to connect various sentence parts to make more complex sentences.

If you put these words together, you can get sentences, but a sentence must have at least one noun or pronoun and at least one verb. "Cat dog" is not a sentence, neither is "ran walked" but "he ran" is a sentence.

Once you get to the point where you understand that words make sentences and words have meanings, you will eventually get to the point where you can use these sentences to express more and more complex ideas. At that point you can go back and read Underseer's post and you will see that he is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Then there are interjections, used to connect various sentence parts to make more complex sentences.

wut

If you put these words together, you can get sentences, but a sentence must have at least one noun or pronoun and at least one verb.

Impressive.

 

[laughing dog]

Well, how can I break this down enough for you.

In English, there are these things called "words", which have various meanings. Some of them are nouns, which represent a person, place, thing, or idea. Some of them are verbs, which represent an action. Adjectives are commonly used to modify nouns, and adverbs are commonly used to modify verbs. Pronouns are sometimes used in place of a noun in order to facilitate speech. Then there are interjections, used to connect various sentence parts to make more complex sentences.

If you put these words together, you can get sentences, but a sentence must have at least one noun or pronoun and at least one verb. "Cat dog" is not a sentence, neither is "ran walked" but "he ran" is a sentence.

Once you get to the point where you understand that words make sentences and words have meanings, you will eventually get to the point where you can use these sentences to express more and more complex ideas.

Your first sentence was wrong. Not one single instance did you actually articulate an argument using Underseer's posts to substantiate your claim.

At that point you can go back and read Underseer's post and you will see that he is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

Repeating an unconvincing claim of fact without evidence does not make it more convincing.

You've already admitted to making one unsupported claim in this thread. So, the weight of evidence so far is that you are once again making unsupported claims of fact. I understand that it is your opinion that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money. But until you back your opinion with some evidence, your opinion seems delusional.

 

[Trausti]

At that point you can go back and read Underseer's post and you will see that he is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

That seems pretty clear. Otherwise why would Underseer obsess over Roy Moore so much? Why did he start this thread?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If you put these words together, you can get sentences, but a sentence must have at least one noun or pronoun and at least one verb.

Impressive.

Sentence fragment.

But until you back your opinion with some evidence, your opinion seems delusional.

You're an expert on delusion.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Sentence fragment.

That is something they teach to elementary school students, but later you learn there is an implied verb and subject. Did you not take high school English? So if someone says "Impressive," you can discern the meaning. At least in the context I used it, it was grammatically valid.

Then there are interjections, used to connect various sentence parts to make more complex sentences.

wut

Jason, you confused interjections and conjunctions.

Lesson for you:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ODGA7ssL-6g

 

[laughing dog]

You're an expert on delusion.

Still waiting for you to present an actual evidence-based argument that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You're an expert on delusion.

Still waiting for you to present an actual evidence-based argument that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

While posting in the thread where he is doing it no less.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And right on its own, my brain starts forming a Broadway musical song, "I Wish I Could Be A Libertarian". Likely sung by a 10 year old.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Jason, you confused interjections and conjunctions.

Yes, I made a mistake.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You're an expert on delusion.

Still waiting for you to present an actual evidence-based argument that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

While posting in the thread where he is doing it no less.

Oh dear. It appears what was a running gag Jason Harvestdancer had with Underseer has turned in to a microcosm of reality about Underseer in their mind.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

And right on its own, my brain starts forming a Broadway musical song, "I Wish I Could Be A Libertarian". Likely sung by a 10 year old.

Why are you so eager to defend a Maga Neocon?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And right on its own, my brain starts forming a Broadway musical song, "I Wish I Could Be A Libertarian". Likely sung by a 10 year old.

Why are you so eager to defend a Maga Neocon?

What now? Is he producing my musical, The Polichitians?

 

[laughing dog]

You're an expert on delusion.

Still waiting for you to present an actual evidence-based argument that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

While posting in the thread where he is doing it no less.

Still waiting for you to present an actual evidence-based argument that Underseer is a Moore-supporting Republican trying to help Moore raise money.

You've had plenty of opportunity to make your case outside of "cuz I thunk it", and still nothing. Which strongly suggests you have no real case to make.

 

[ZiprHead]

C'mon, guys. We all know right-wingers are humor denied.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Jason, you confused interjections and conjunctions.

Yes, I made a mistake.

When you try to use pedantry as a tool of sarcasm, but make a mistake, it loses its effect. Or is it affect? I guess it doesn't really matter. The real thing that matters is you know Underseer doesn't support Moore. You are somehow offended by the word conservolibertarian. I don't get it, though, since Moore was getting his support from conservatives who fancy themselves libertarians talking second amendment seriously and getting posters on lewrockwell.com to support him, why would you take offense? All you have to do is respond that you don't support Moore. You are an individual. Of course, there are people who have said it's better to elect a pedophile than a Democrat and there are some pretty staunchly conservative people in the forum as well as a couple who call themselves libertarian conservatives. You aren't them, though, and everyone is aware of that. Perhaps instead of taking your anger out by pretending over and over Underseer is spamming the forum, you could be angry that there are conservatives who pretend to be libertarian like Rand Paul or maxparrish. Unless you actually agree that Rand Paul and maxparrish are libertarian, in which case the term of conservolibertarian is an apt term and you'll just have to stop being angry that libertarianism is so closely aligned to conservatism that there are so many comparisons. OR you could instead choose to be angry that Roy Moore did what he did. Why don't you choose to be outraged that a person in a position of power--you know, the government, chose to use that power and influence to get a girl out of her school class and harass her and worse. So much more to be upset about than a word and so much more you could do than try to justify your perceived tit-for-tat ad infinitum. Who knows what you'll write next, though...