So, when Phrodeau is proven wrong, he chickens out and disappears

[LeahLo519]

*watches LT's head swell*

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Once again you have merely DESCRIBED them, not DEFINED them. I suggest you reenter 3rd grade to understand the difference.

Wow. You really are that stupid, aren't you? Why do you even bother to debate politics when the simple definitions of 'define' and 'describe' elude you?

 

[phrodeau]

Do a search, and you'll find that LovingTongue has never used the words "extol" or "extolling" before I taught it to him.

You can see where he asked me to look it up, too.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Do a search, and you'll find that LovingTongue has never used the words "extol" or "extolling" before I taught it to him.

You can see where he asked me to look it up, too.

So? You've shown that you don't even know the real meaning of the word. The more you use it the stupider you look.

 

[WingNut_N_Bolt]

Do a search, and you'll find that LovingTongue has never used the words "extol" or "extolling" before I taught it to him.

You can see where he asked me to look it up, too.

Do you have a link, it would save time.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Do you have a link, it would save time.

Phrodeau has used "extol" many times but it is obvious from this thread that he never learned what it means.

Which is why he is avoiding my direct challenge to his attempted usage of the word.

 

[cloudy]

Phrodeau has used "extol" many times but it is obvious from this thread that he never learned what it means.

Which is why he is avoiding my direct challenge to his attempted usage of the word.

I'll back you on that, LT. I read the thread, and yep, he was wrong.

 

[Gringao]

*watches LT's head swell*

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

We're still waiting for you to be right once.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

I'll back you on that, LT. I read the thread, and yep, he was wrong.

He's not going to understand you... you need to write it in crayola-ese.

 

[cloudy]

He's not going to understand you... you need to write it in crayola-ese.

Oops, my bad. Let me see if I can find a Sesame Street translator, and I'll get back to you.

 

[phrodeau]

This is what LT posted here.

If Canada invaded the US looking for WMD's (funny, how we've got plenty of those!) and Al Qaeda connections (hello, Dubya anyone? OIL industry, anyone?), there'd be rape rooms GALORE and even guillotines set up all over the country, and I'd be one of the first to build a head chopper to welcome our Canadian wanna-be masters.

To me, it looks like LT would be pleased as punch to see some rape rooms on American soil.

Now, LT doesn't want people to think that he hates women, so when I pointed out that he's extolling rape rooms, he points to another part of the above post, where he wrote:

I love killing people, especially invaders and bullies. No use in denying that. Hell, I'd probably kill the Americans running the rape rooms AND the invaders, too. I'd be in anger management heaven.

It's obvious to me that he isn't the least interested in eliminating these hypothetical rape rooms, but instead he'd like to use them to justify a killing spree.

I thought LT would be able to understand without having to spell the whole thing out for him. There I was wrong.

 

[Gringao]

LT's a few sandwiches short of a party platter, P, not to mention too dense to know when he's been had.

 

[phrodeau]

Do you have a link, it would save time.

Here is where he was asking me to look it up.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

This is what LT posted here. To me, it looks like LT would be pleased as punch to see some rape rooms on American soil.

By that logic, it should look to you like I would be pleased as punch to see draft supporters, too.

Now, LT doesn't want people to think that he hates women,

I don't. And you have no evidence that supports your oft-spoken, wrong headed claim that I do. I've kicked your ass repeatedly on here for uttering that accusation, but you chicken out and disappear when the foot finds its way up your ass.

Now I've got you cornered. Post the proof or look like an even more complete idiot.

so when I pointed out that he's extolling rape rooms, he points to another part of the above post, where he wrote:

LOL OMFG 1.0

Phrodeau logic: "If I accuse LT of extolling rape rooms and LT shows contradictory evidence in the form of his prior threat to kill anyone who creates them, it is obvious to me that he isn't the least bit interested in eliminating these things."

It's obvious to me that he isn't the least interested in eliminating these hypothetical rape rooms, but instead he'd like to use them to justify a killing spree.

LOL OMFG 2.0 so when I specifically threatened to target these people for a killing spree, somehow that proves I'm not interested in eliminating these horrors?


Phrodeau, we don't have any idea what planet full of Freudian fraudulent fakers you come from, but here on Earth, threatening to kill someone for doing something is always the exact opposite of extolling that something. Anyone who says "I plan on killing people if they set up rape rooms" means they intend to get rid of the rape rooms and make a gruesome example of the people who made them. This pathetic dunderfucked abortion of an argument that you're making may fly in whatever methane-filled atmosphere you breathe, but it's a lead brick here.

No one ever extols what they threaten to kill.

Too bad you're too much of a flaming idiot - or perhaps, a space alien - to grasp this.

I was wrong.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

LT's a few sandwiches short of a party platter, P, not to mention too dense to know when he's been had.

It is a fact that is far beyond any hope of dispute that absolutely no one extols what they treaten to kill. That fact stands immune to refutation. Game over. You just sank with the ship.

 

[phrodeau]

It is a fact that is far beyond any hope of dispute that absolutely no one extols what they treaten to kill. That fact stands immune to refutation. Game over. You just sank with the ship.

Ridiculous. There are several industries devoted to sportsmen that would give the lie to your assertion.

Your arguments are fallacious. Do you want me to look that word up for you, too?

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Ridiculous. There are several industries devoted to sportsmen that would give the lie to your assertion.

This is not about sportsmen, it is about politics and ideology. Your argument is fallacious, untrue, baseless and now it isn't even relevant.

No one ever extols what they kill.

I have never posted anything that shows I hate women.

You've lost yet another fight with me because you tripped on your fucked up reading comprehension again.

 

[phrodeau]

Bump.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

I'm still waiting for someone to show me how you can extol what you plan to kill.

 

[bronzeage]

I'm still waiting for someone to show me how you can extol what you plan to kill.

These guys do it all the time.


Ducks Unlimited

 

[phrodeau]

The Dakota Sioux believed that buffalo were spiritual agents. So there's ideology for you.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

These guys do it all the time.


Ducks Unlimited

Actions speak louder than words. Killing someone doesn't glorify them.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

The Dakota Sioux believed that buffalo were spiritual agents. So there's ideology for you.

Well, you know what, you go ahead and run with that definition of extolling. Perhaps your confusion about what 'extol' means stems from you always being the proverbial buffalo... or more accurately, Bronzeage's proverbial duck.

http://www.alexross.com/81122-big.jpg

So one day, when I knowingly and premeditatedly come to your door with a copy of the first page of Dr. Seuss's "The Cat In The Hat" and you look at it and your brain explodes, I'll explain to the judge that I did not kill you... I extolled you.

Kill = extol. Alrighty, pardner. You go with that. Your argument is inherently a Darwinian self-correcting error.