About Jan

[Blank Verse]

What I offer here is an involved yet detached look at Jan's hijinks. Perhaps time, further study, and more reflection will either modify or enrich the analysis offered here, but the long-term consequences of Jan's vituperations are rarely examined, let alone subjected to scientific scrutiny. For openers, Jan likes to reinforce the concept of collective guilt that is the root of all prejudice. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Jan and her cohorts will run for cover, like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must reverse the devolutionary course Jan has set for us. Some will say I exaggerate, but, actually, I'm being quite lenient. I didn't mention, for example, that I unequivocally dislike her. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, Jan's vassals have learned their scripts well, and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. To put this in context, Jan is entirely gung-ho about diabolism because she lacks more pressing soapbox issues. Each rung on the ladder of defeatism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for her to separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities. That is the standard process by which callow, egocentric paranoiacs create widespread hysteria.

Do you understand the implications of what I have been telling you? Are you awake? Then you probably realize that Jan would have us believe that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Jan is surrounded by out-of-touch stool pigeons who parrot the same nonsense, which is why many people are incredulous when I tell them that she intends to introduce disease, ignorance, squalor, idleness, and want into affluent neighborhoods. "How could Jan be so soporific?", they ask me. "It doesn't seem possible." Well, it is undoubtedly possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Jan plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that if she were as bright as she thinks she is, she'd know that if you read between the lines of her subliminal psywar campaigns, you'll decidedly find that no matter how bad you think her ideologies are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think.

Jan says that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to her heinous prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. Even when the facts don't fit, she sometimes tries to use them anyway. She still maintains, for instance, that the Universe belongs to her by right. Jan would have us believe that she defends the real needs of the working class. Yeah, right. Her activities have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. I would like to go on, but I do have to keep this letter short. So I'll wrap it up by saying that these issues are actually political issues.


http://hugin.sigusr1.org/~pakin/complaint :p

[Jan]

What would I do without Blank to provide me with a non-stop source of whiney, dissolute methods of interpretation to complain about? What follows is the story of how Blank can be so rich in the rhetoric of democracy and yet so poor in its implementation. He is doing everything in his power to make me get fired from my job. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. People who are attacked by the most brainless reprobates I've ever seen basically have three options. They can ignore the attacks, engage the attackers in a debate, or apply some sanction which will put an end to the attack. This brings us to the dark underside of Blank's scribblings, the side that's known to hamstring our efforts to stand uncompromised in a world that's on the brink of Blank-induced disaster.

He once heard some presumptuous bozos say, "Skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius." What's amazing is that Blank was then able to use that quotation plus some anecdotal evidence to convince his stooges that censorship could benefit us, which surely makes me wonder, "Is it really his impression that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate?" It's an interesting question, and its examination will help us understand how Blank's mind works. Let me start by providing evidence that when Blank says that egotism is the key to world peace, that's just a load of spucatum tauri. Too many emotions to count raced through my mind when I first realized that he shouldn't prevent people from thinking and visualizing beyond an increasingly psychologically caged existence. That would be like asking a question at a news conference and, too angry and passionate to wait for the answer, exiting the auditorium before the response. Both of those actions discredit and intimidate the opposition. Blank's comrades all look like Blank, think like Blank, act like Blank, and withhold information and disseminate half truths and whole lies, just like Blank does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha! Does anybody else feel the way I do, or am I alone in my disgust with Blank?

:o

[Blank Verse]

the gloves come off:

Because of Jan's attitude, I usually don't respond to her hastily mounted campaigns, but this time I'll make an exception. Let me preface my discussion by quickly reasserting a familiar theme of my previous letters: It will not be easy to uplift individuals and communities on a global scale to provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that, for the overriding reason that I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. But I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like Jan dismantle the guard rails that protect society from the insane elements in its midst. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world. Following this line of logic, it would appear that Jan has spent untold hours trying to fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd. During that time, did it ever once occur to her that her use of whiney drug addicts is undoubtedly pathetic? This can be answered most easily by stating that I cannot promise not to be angry at her. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads Jan -- to promote racial superiority doctrines, ethnic persecution, imperialist expansion, and genocide. From secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, her legatees have always found a way to condemn children to a life of drugs, gangs, drinking, rape, incest, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and a number of other horrors.

Although Jan wants to throw us into a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation, if we fail to help people see her chauvinistic vaporings for what they are, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. Show me where it says she has the right to combine, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying. As a matter of fact, she has recently been going around claiming that the ideas of "freedom" and "vigilantism" are Siamese twins. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk.

Why is Jan really so mingy? Is it because her epigrams are more often out of sync with democratic values than aligned with them? Or because there is little question that things are apt to get worse before they get better? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. Her comments have no place in a free, humane society of individual value, individual choice, and individual responsibility. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and, in many cases, it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it undeniably expresses how her inveracities are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. And they promote the mistaken idea that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. I have not forgotten that there is no time and little temptation for those who work hard on their jobs and their responsibilities to don the mantel of egotism and reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. I have not forgotten that Jan has no moral courage, nor even a desire to be honest and forthright. And I cannot forget that the hysteria and witch-hunts fueled by Jan's zingers will befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion by the end of the decade. I mean, think about it. I would like to go on, but I do have to keep this letter short. So I'll wrap it up by saying that Jan was voted "most likely to foment brown-nosing forms of political tyranny" by her peers.

:devious2:

[Dean]

What the ----?

[Dean]

My topic is nothing new. However, since no one else has found it fit to address directly, I will address it here. For complete details, I refer you to my forthcoming book on the subject. I shall here mention only a few random items that may be new or especially interesting to you. For instance, AOL can't possibly believe that I'm too negligent to carry out this matter to the full extent of the law. It's stupid, but it's not that stupid. AOL, get a life! Are AOL's drug-induced ravings good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that we should begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action. (Goodness knows, our elected officials aren't going to.)

Whatever else may be the case, it is certain that I want to nourish children with good morals and self-esteem. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Where do subhuman, headlong sciolists like AOL come from, and what are we going to do with them? On the surface, it would seem to have something to do with the way that AOL works from the false assumption that most people actually want obtuse big-mouths to exercise both subtlety and thoroughness in managing both the news and the entertainment that gets presented to us. But upon further investigation, one will find that there are those who are informed and educated about the evils of clericalism, and there are those who are not. AOL is one of the uninformed, naturally, and that's why it hates it when you say that it lectures us about Pyrrhonism so often that it may soon become a major source of hearing loss. It really hates it when you say that. Try saying that to it sometime, if you have a thick skin and don't mind having it shriek insults at you. One may very well question whether AOL is notorious for trying to lure the maladroit into its camp. Still, most people will eventually be convinced that almost every day, it outreaches itself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's indisputably breathtaking to watch it. We must issue a call to conscience and reason. If we fail in this, we are not failing someone else; we are not disrupting some interest separate from ourselves. Rather, it is we who suffer when we neglect to observe that AOL's stupidity concerning sadism is laughable. End of story. Actually, I should add that it has been said that its thralls are cut from the same mold as corrupt, misguided buffoons. I, in turn, maintain that its factotums all look like it, think like it, act like it, and trample over the very freedoms and rights that it claims to support, just like AOL does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha!

I discussed this topic in a previous letter, so I will not go into great detail now, but AOL truly believes that its vices are the only true virtues. I hope you realize that that's just a domineering pipe dream from a power-hungry pipe, and that in the real world, AOL parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, its ideas will change instantly, like a weathercock. What that means, simply put, is that some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that I unquestionably cannot believe that AOL would consider pea-brained ogres as slovenly bullies. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation.

On that note, let me say that I know that there is something inherently wrong with an organization that wants, more than anything else, to detach individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity -- family, class, private associations. You know that. But does AOL know we know that? Any honest person who takes the time to think about that question will be forced to conclude that AOL can get away with lies (e.g., that there is an international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids), because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that AOL is lying. It is difficult, if not impossible, for people to come up with an accurate conclusion if the only information AOL has given them is false. It is unclear whether this is because within the deleterious milieu of antipluralism exists the opportunity for AOL to put the gods of heaven into the corner as obsolete and outmoded and, in their stead, burn incense to the idol Mammon, because it hates, with a pure and perfect hatred, all those who provide an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from colonialism, propagandism, and all other forms of prejudice and intolerance, or a combination of the two.

I may not believe that phallocentrism is the key to world peace, but I honestly do think that besides being blatantly sexist towards the female gender, it is thoroughly fatuous. (Actually, I could make a long argument for the idea that its obiter dicta are steeped in neo-pestiferous irrationalism, but that's not important now.) Now, why all this fuss about a few superstitious politics? Simply put, it's because all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of AOL's ethically bankrupt, virulent personal attacks. They are not a cause; they are an effect. Is it not positively the distinguishing feature of AOL's treatises to use mass organization as a system of integration and control? And if you think that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to defy the law of the land, then you aren't thinking very clearly.

I cannot emphasize enough how much I resent AOL's catch-phrases. AOL's victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of AOL's followers, who loudly proclaim that without AOL's superior guidance, we will go nowhere. Regardless of those foolhardy proclamations, the truth is that the first lies that it told us were relatively benign. Still, they have been progressing. And they will continue to progress until there is no more truth; AOL's lies will grow until they blot out the sun. Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and we must push a consistent vision that responds to most people's growing fears about chauvinistic, uncivilized cheapskates. Only then can a society free of its loathsome harangues blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that I am confident that unstable, indelicate vengeful-types will come to their own conclusions about all of these matters. We can therefore extrapolate that its bons mots are not witty satire, as AOL would have you believe. They're simply the contemptuous ramblings of something that has no idea or appreciation of what it's mocking.

If AOL succeeds in its attempt to pervert human instincts by suppressing natural, feral constraints and encouraging abnormal patterns of behavior, it'll have to be over my dead body. I have two words to say about AOL's perversions: hideous poppycock. My goal is to break the neck of AOL's policy of sensationalism once and for all. I might not be successful at achieving that goal, but I doubtlessly do have to try. AOL says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Yet it also wants to extinguish the voices of opposition. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask, because most of you reading this letter have your hearts in the right place. Now follow your hearts with actions.

AOL should think for itself, but, as you know, the question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "Where are the people who are willing to stand up and acknowledge that when AOL is gone, all that will be left from its legacy of hate is the hate itself?" That's the question that perplexes me the most, because inasmuch as I disagree with AOL's accusations and find its ad hominem attacks offensive, I am happy to meet AOL's speech with more speech and, if necessary, continue this discussion until the truth shines. It's my hunch that compared to these sexist, abominable devil-worshippers, every pimp is a man of honor. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that if the people generally are relying on false information sown by pugnacious lackwits, then correcting that situation becomes a priority for the defense of our nation.

Credentialism and isolationism are not synonymous. In fact, they are so frequently in opposition and so universally irreconcilable that my current plan is to convince pernicious dunderheads to stop supporting AOL and tolerating its rantings. Yes, it will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but it wants us to feel sorry for the pouty, blockish grizzlers who mortgage away our future. I, not being one of the many pathological lumpenproletariats of this world, feel we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that AOL's true goal is to subject us to the complacent yapping of dastardly scumbags. All the statements that its legates make to justify or downplay that goal are only apologetics; they do nothing to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. If AOL is going to talk about higher standards, then it needs to live by those higher standards.

[Dean]

If it weren't for perfidious lame-brained-types, AOL would have no friends. In the past, when I complained that AOL was attempting to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us, I was told that I was just being resentful. But nowadays, people realize that it is the embodiment of everything petty in our lives. Every grievance, every envy, every arrogant ideology finds expression in AOL. The more we give AOL, the more it wants. Of course, this sounds simple, but in reality, the real issue is simple: I, for one, predict catastrophe. I challenge you to ponder this subject with the broadest vision possible.

[Jan]

5 paragraph was better :p, but I couldn't be bothered starting another post!

There are many foolhardy feckless-types who want to eviscerate freedom of speech and sexual privacy rights. One -- Blank -- is so quixotic, he deserves special mention. I want to share this with you because Blank has commented that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his saturnine, abhorrent prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. I would love to refute that, but there seems to be no need, seeing as his comment is lacking in common sense. When you tell Blank's expositors that Blank weeps crocodile tears for those who suffer as a result of his half-measures, they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, his apologists have always found a way to drive us into a state of apoplexy.

What's interesting is that his true goal is to create a confused, nefarious world of guilt and shame. All the statements that his lickspittles make to justify or downplay that goal are only apologetics; they do nothing to invite all the people who have been harmed by Blank to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. We must learn to celebrate our diversity, not because it is the politically correct thing to do, but because I am honestly not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that Blank's ebullitions are as self-absorbed as they are an insult to human intelligence. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about his brainless behavior, but about the way that ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Blank would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being insidious. Almost every day, Blank outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's decidedly breathtaking to watch him. That's a very important point; for the nonce, he is content to support international crime while purporting to oppose it. But by the next full moon, he will make empty promises. Did it ever occur to Blank that maybe the magnitude of his lies should disgust anyone who has an even moderate education? Dream on.

My dream is for tired eyes to open and see clearly, broken spirits to find new energy, and weary arms to find the strength to show principle, gumption, verve, and nerve. I don't mean to throw fuel on an already considerable fire, but he fears nothing more than the exposure of his motives and activities. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: His acolytes are blissfully ignorant of his refractory press releases. More than that, wanting to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice without any of the obvious repercussions is like wanting a one-sided coin. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Blank should do some research next time before printing half-truths and misinformation, at least insofar as this essay is concerned. His premise (that his catch-phrases are our final line of defense against tyrrany) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Blank uses this disguised morality to support his opuscula, thereby making his argument self-refuting. Why does he want to pass off all sorts of ostentatious and obviously soulless stuff on others as a so-called "inner experience"? Because a number of serious questions need to be asked -- and answered -- before we give him carte blanche to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us. That's not the only reason, of course, but I'll get to the other reasons later. In closing, all that I ask is that you join me to stop Blank and condemn his hypocrisy.

[Blank Verse]

I promise this is my last one...but it's a gooder:

I would like to take a moment to force Jan into early retirement. What follows is a series of remarks addressed to the readers of this letter and to Jan herself. Even if our society had no social problems at all, we could still say that her foot soldiers are tools. Like a hammer or an axe, they are not inherently evil or destructive. The evil is in the force that manipulates them and uses them for destructive purposes. That evil is Jan, who wants nothing less than to alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations. While we all despair over her hotheaded smear tactics, we must also remember the principles that will guide our better behaviors and higher aspirations. As it turns out, I, for one, will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to place blame where it belongs -- in the hands of Jan and her peremptory myrmidons.

Jan, as usual, you prove yourself to be lackluster. I mean, I want to give the needy a helping hand, as opposed to an elbow in the face. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Why do her shills want to ingratiate themselves with her? That's the question that perplexes me the most, because I find that some of her choices of words in her recommendations would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "hypocritical" for "unproportionableness" and "corrupt" for "mediterraneanization." Jan's trained seals are often caught trying to reduce human beings to the status of domestic animals. Of course, they deny this, but we all know full well that I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I contend that there is, because ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Jan would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being jackbooted.

Since most people oppose her immature, ruthless philippics, Jan has had to give lunatics control of the asylum using every conniving means imaginable. She is a pretty good liar most of the time. However, she tells so many lies, she's bound to trip herself up someday. She has gotten away with so much for so long that she's lost all sense of caution, all sense of limits. If you think about it, only a woman without any sense of limits could desire to use our weaknesses to her advantage. The only way out of Jan's rat maze is to shatter the illusion that it is not only acceptable, but indeed desirable, to instill a general ennui. It's that simple.

[Jan]

My last too :p

What I am about to say is strictly off the record. On that understanding, I shall give you candidly and without circumlocution the best estimate of our present plight that I have been able to make. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I call for proper disciplinary action against Blank and his flunkies. He thinks that those who disagree with him should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. However, his sermons are part and parcel of a larger game plan to enact new laws forcing anyone who's not one of his deputies to live in an environment that can, at best, be described as contemptuously tolerant.

I indubitably seek nothing but justice. That's clear. But he frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what he is doing -- as opposed to what he is saying -- to understand his true aims. I'll let you in on a little secret: people tell me that Blank shows a complete lack of foresight. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. When Blank says that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications, he's just plain wrong -- not "partially wrong", but "thoroughly and entirely wrong". And that's the honest truth.

[conkermaniac]

Bah, this isn't anything new. :p

[CareBear]

*is so confused* :confused2

[Jan]

You confuse easy CareBear...:p Sure beats talking about wars that may happen :classic2:

[CareBear]

Originally posted by Jan
You confuse easy CareBear...:pThat's what happens when I don't click on links in post :o
It makes a whole lot more sense now :)

[Daniel]

I'm not about to read all that...so summarize the entire thread in 2 sentences for me please...

[CareBear]

Originally posted by Daniel
I'm not about to read all that...so summarize the entire thread in 2 sentences for me please... I can do it in two words now :D

"click here (http://hugin.sigusr1.org/~pakin/complaint)"

[Blank Verse]

it's auto generated bull----, Daniel!

[notnamed]

After reading this letter, you will never again be able to trust BubbleWrap Productions, and you will see with crystal clarity the way that it has worn out its welcome. Instead of focusing on why it is a faithful student of Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese strategist who advocated demoralizing one's enemy as the highest art of warfare, I would like to remind people that if you ever ask it to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. It seems clear that my vision is built on the future, not the past. But we ought to look at the matter in a broader framework before we draw final conclusions on the subject: We see that BubbleWrap Productions keeps saying that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, if you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Though many people agree that we must work together against careerism, masochism, recidivism, etc., BubbleWrap Productions contends that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate. Excuse me, but where exactly did this little factoid come from?

Let's be frank: I believe I have finally figured out what makes organizations like BubbleWrap Productions humiliate, subjugate, and eventually, eliminate everyone who wants to improve the lot of humankind. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world. You may balk at this, but if BubbleWrap Productions is victorious in its quest to usher in the beginning of a heinous new era of nativism, then its crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity.

There is a great temperamental and ideological divide between those who lead an active disinformation campaign and those who protect our peace, privacy, and safety. Although others may disagree with that claim, few would dispute that BubbleWrap Productions is not only immoral, but amoral. I can repeat with undiminished conviction something I said eons ago: Given the amount of misinformation that BubbleWrap Productions is circulating, I must point out that it wants nothing less than to preach fear and ignorance, hence its repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of its diabolic, sniffish litanies. Ostensibly, BubbleWrap Productions does not intend to advocate morally crippled bromides, but in fact, its "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is ethically bankrupt, because it leaves no room for compromise.

Another point worth thinking about is that BubbleWrap Productions throws a tantrum every time it doesn't get what it wants. It vehemently denies that, of course. But it obviously would, because it proclaims at every opportunity that it'd never inject its lethal poison into our children's minds and souls. The organization doth protest too much, methinks. BubbleWrap Productions's most progressive idea is to subject human beings to indignities. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way.

Consequently, it has been said that BubbleWrap Productions subordinates rationality in decision making. I believe that to be true. I also believe that it would have us believe that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But BubbleWrap Productions is surrounded by ghastly mouthpieces for ignorant Stalinism who parrot the same nonsense, which is why after hearing about its money-grubbing attempts to assail all that is holy, I was saddened. I was saddened that it has lowered itself to this level. BubbleWrap Productions thinks we want it to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation. Excuse me, but maybe the objection may still be raised that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. At first glance, this sounds almost believable. Yet the following must be borne in mind: I've tried explaining to its buddies that only those individuals who are able to accept evidence and think clearly about it can ratchet up our level of understanding, but it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. A recent series of hearings, lawsuits, and media reports demonstrates that if BubbleWrap Productions opened its eyes, it'd realize that it obscures the true meaning of its dissertations with propaganda and fancy talk. Finally, to those of you who are faithfully helping me explain a few facets of this confusing world around us, let me extend, as always, my deepest gratitude and my most affectionate regards.

I didn't read the whole thing, but it looks kind of funny. Took this off a website...how daaaare they!!!
:p

[Daniel]

Originally posted by Blank Verse
it's auto generated bull----, Daniel!

Yea exactly...I don't want to read it...

So...summarize exactly what it says in 2 sentences.

[bigperm]

This letter is not meant to be witty or insulting, and I am afraid I won't even be able to make it eloquent. But I will do the best I can to face our problems realistically, get to the root of our problems, and be determined to solve them. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about irresponsible materialistic-types. To deny that identifying and naming the worst sorts of violent, self-indulgent vagrants I've ever seen is fundamentally different from using their smear tactics as an instrument of rebellion is hectoring nonsense and political irresponsibility. It is nonsense because Mr. Bigperm A. Stoner should not be allowed to operate heavy machinery, specifically, his ego. And it is irresponsible because he believes that the ideas of "freedom" and "exclusionism" are Siamese twins. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by Bigperm and his unstable functionaries.

Although the moral absolutist position is well represented by social and political activists and unequivocally influences legislators and policy makers, when he hears anyone say that those who think that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not should think again, his answer is to leave behind a wake of crafty reaction. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to bring him to justice. I feel no more personal hatred for Bigperm than I might feel for a herd of wild animals or a cluster of poisonous reptiles. One does not hate those whose souls can exude no spiritual warmth; one pities them. Might I suggest that he search for a hobby? It seems Bigperm has entirely too much time on his hands, given how often he tries to trade fundamental human rights for a cheap "guarantee" of safety and security. I am concerned that his vague and overly broad definition of "orbiculatoelliptical" will cause pusillanimous lounge lizards to do the devil's work in the coming days. This applies first and foremost to a group under whose resentful brand of philistinism the whole of honest humanity is suffering: backwards twits.

In his ravings, teetotalism is witting and unremitting, boisterous and pernicious. He revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to ignore compromise and focus solely on his personal agenda. Never mind that we have fallen into Bigperm's trap. What's really important is that it is immature and stupid of Bigperm to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to give him condign punishment, and that's why I say that as that last sentence suggests, I should note that he has no ground and no right to hinder economic growth and job creation. But you knew that already. So let me add that whenever anyone states the obvious -- that the idea of letting him create anomie is, in itself, refractory -- discussion naturally progresses towards the question, "What provoked him to establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion?" To turn that question around, whatever happened to community standards? Well, if I knew that, I'd be in Stockholm picking up my prize and a sizable check. Are you still with me?

Please let me explain that Bigperm's supporters say, "He can perpetuate inaccurate and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships and get away with it." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that prudence is no vice. Cowardice -- especially Bigperm's surly form of it -- is. Already, some unforgiving con artists have begun to create an untrue and injurious impression of an entire people, and with terrifying and tragic results. What values will follow from their camp is anyone's guess.

Bigperm weeps crocodile tears for those who suffer as a result of his catch-phrases. But the problems with Bigperm's modes of thought don't end there. If he can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If he can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. Bigperm thinks that the sun rises just for him. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Does he have trouble living with himself, knowing that I honestly don't want to have to hear his rambling streams of consciousness? Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that if we don't focus on what unites rather than divides us right now, then Bigperm's opuscula will soon start to metastasize until they rely on the psychological effects of terror to magnify the localized effects of Bigperm's insinuations so that, like a stone hurled into a pool of water, shock waves ripple from the epicenter of his attacks to the furthest reaches of the Earth. I hope I haven't bored you by writing an entire letter about Mr. Bigperm A. Stoner. Still, this letter was the best way to explain to you that Bigperm's fixation with splenetic spouters is bleeding-heart.

[lotsofissues]

The bombast! My ears are in pain!!