[The following should not be read by children or those of mild temperment, but I cannot remain silent any longer. The truth must be told.]
I would like to take this opportunity to surmise that [name withheld] is a no good, dirty rotten horsefucker. And by that I mean, they fuck horses. They do it in the mornings, in the afternoons, and in the evenings. They fuck them frequently, and with maliciousness. They may be paid to fuck horses, or may be doing it as for free. It may, in fact, be a horsefucking conspiracy -- that is, a conspiracy among a shady group of horsefuckers who fuck horses.
Now, please understand, I wish to be fair -- I have no actual evidence of horsefuckery. I am merely saying that my opponent seems like the type of individual who would fuck horses. And, in fact, I have been suspicious that my opponent fucks horses for some time, and have pondered about this repeatedly. I have left comments suggesting that they fuck horses; I have written diaries suggesting that they fuck horses; and now I have crafted my own blog, to better continue exploring how my opponent fucks horses.
My opponent, however, I expect will now do one of several things. Each of them are equally damning.
First, and most likely, they will ignore my charges that they are indeed horsefuckers, refusing to respond to them substantively. At this point, my suspicions will be confirmed. Do you not think it very interesting that my opponent refuses to acknowledge or debate the charges of horsefuckery leveled against them? Do you not find their silence suspicious? Telling, even? It seems to me that if someone were being called a horsefucker, any person who did not repeatedly fuck horses would deny it, and emphatically.
The second possibility is that my opponent may very well indeed deny that they fuck horses. They may even deny it emphatically. But that, too, is clearly the response one would except from a person who secretly fucks horses. Nobody is going to admit that they frequently perform sexual actions with a horse -- clearly, anyone who did fuck horses would deny it, much like my opponent. Remarkably like my opponent, in fact. The single biggest similarity between any Prairie Pornographer off the street and my opponent is that they will both deny doing the barnyard deed: truly, this seems too coincedental to be a coincidence.
There is, of course, a third possible response available. My opponent may indeed get angry at me for bringing up these charges of rampant horsefuckery. They may lash out in bitterness, citing that perhaps I am lying about their fucking of horses, or perhaps I am picking and choosing facts and calling them "evidence" of horsefucking, or perhaps I am simply inventing my facts wholesale regarding their equine fornication.
Woe to them! For by getting angry about my utterly unsubstantiated charges that they fuck horses, that, more then anything else, demonstrates that they have something to hide! No, an angry response -- no matter how provoked -- is the best evidence of all of shenaniganus horsefuckius. Clearly, and I think anyone who is not currently fucking horses would agree with me, getting angry about spurious horsefuckery charges is evidence of a bitter spirit and quick temper, and demonstrates exactly the temperament that would, and let us be blunt here, fuck horses on a daily and nightly basis.
Think about it! Why would anyone be angry about a fabricated charges of horsefucking against them, or trumped up conspiracies about a network of horsefucking cast in their direction? Would not the more reasonable action, if my opponent has nothing to hide, be to ignore my charges that they are horsefuckers? Tsk, tsk.
Given these damning charges that my opponent Rides The Range Fantastic, there is only one course of action available. My opponent must agree with me to an extended, multi-week debate with me as to their horsefucking status. They must listen to my descriptions of how they fuck horses, and respond to them. They must drop all else, and give credence to my assertions that they are indeed horsefuckers by publicly debating the point with me. Perhaps they will be willing to settle on an admission of guilt whereby we can debate whether, even if they do not fuck horses, they perhaps fuck goats, or maybe dogs -- such compromises may be available to them.
But what I will not settle for is any argument that my charges of rampant, stable-rattling horsefuckery are baseless or evidenceless or the product of a mind that sees conspiracies about horsefucking behind every tree and mailbox. I will not be silenced!
So a debate, and an extended one at that, would be a reasonable response to my charges. But I know, no matter how long or how brilliantly I make the argument that my opponent is, indeed, a dabbler in hooved romance, or how effortlessly and repeatedly I accuse my opponent of those flaxen-tailed indiscretions, my opponent will eventually give up on the debate. They will eventually tire of the same points, made the same way, or may eventually simply be insulted by my varied and imaginative explorations of their unequivocal pattern of horsefuckery, and start ignoring me.
And that, if I may say so, would be quite suspicious.
By the way, none of this is to imply that my opponent actually is a horsefucker. I would not make such charges, and I don't see how anyone reading this could possibly have gotten that impression. If you think such a thing, I think it is possibly because you lack any reading comprehension skills whatsoever, or perhaps it is because you are yourself, indeed, a horsefucker.
Now you know the secrets of the Horsefucker Sketch, also known as the Horsefucker Argument, also known as the Flying Horsefucker Fighting Style, also known as argument ad horsefuckium. You may recognize it in other situations online. Say, for example, on a daily basis. But if you do, don't point it out. Because that would make you, well... a horsefucker.