O
old.SHY-FX
Guest
Here's the angry letter Crashpaddy knew he was bound to receive. But first, let me pose you a question: Is Crashpaddy actually concerned about any of us, or does he just want to destroy our moral fiber? After reading this letter, you'll doubtlessly find it's the latter. Priggism doesn't work. So why does Crashpaddy cling to it? In other words, what meaningless self-inflicted psychological trauma is Crashpaddy going through now? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: Why aren't our children being warned about Crashpaddy in school? On the surface, it would seem to have something to do with the way that Crashpaddy's sound bites have reached a depth of degeneracy that was virtually unknown in the past. But upon further investigation, one will find that his sentiments are uniformly riddled by an unbelievable degree of ignorance. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to hinder the power of huffy, malicious twaddlers like him. Easy as it may seem to challenge him to defend his witticisms or else to change them, it is far more difficult to focus on the major economic, social, and political forces that provide the setting for the expression of a callow agenda. I apologize if what I'm saying sounds painfully obvious, painfully self-evident. However, it is so extremely important that I must unequivocally say it.
Oh, and one more thing. Implying that we should avoid personal responsibility is no different from implying that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Crashpaddy's demands. Both statements are ludicrous. There can be no doubt that I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that the main dissensus between me and Crashpaddy is that I claim that it is crystal-clear that it should scarcely seem questionable to anyone that the surest way for Crashpaddy's advocates to succeed is for them to trick our children into adopting unconventional, disapproved-of opinions and ways of life. He, on the other hand, contends that he is a model citizen.
Whenever someone tells him not to make serious dialogue difficult or impossible, Crashpaddy gets all teary-eyed. My, my; how sad. My heart bleeds for him, it really does. To be fair, his prognoses are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. He parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, his ideas will change instantly, like a weathercock.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is neither a document written in anger nor something I am being paid to write. In fact, I have said that to Crashpaddy on many occasions, and I will keep on saying it until he stops trying to subject us to the fork-tongued yapping of self-indulgent, illaudable airheads. As noisome as his pronouncements are, he has shown he's not afraid to be distasteful. Crashpaddy vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would, because it's possible that he doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of demagogism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we shine a light on his efforts to curry favor with imperious vagrants using a barrage of flattery, especially recognition of their "value," their "importance," their "educational mission," and other virulent nonsense.
Already, some judgmental, loquacious sciolists have begun to suppress people's instinct and intellect, and with terrifying and tragic results. What morals will follow from their camp is anyone's guess. But I digress. If one dares to criticize even a single tenet of Crashpaddy's protests, one is promptly condemned as shabby, intransigent, foolhardy, or whatever epithet Crashpaddy deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation.
What's more, he contends that his fairy tales prevent smallpox. Excuse me, but where exactly did this little factoid come from? Crashpaddy's ability to reason from premise to conclusion is nearly non-existent. This applies first and foremost to a group under whose malodorous brand of boosterism the whole of honest humanity is suffering: irritating, craven clueless-types. Isn't it historically demonstrated that Crashpaddy unfairly lambastes people who are trying to do the best they can in a bad situation? I ask, because everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that his stooges argue that barbaric firebrands are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. These are the same power-hungry tricksters who insult my intelligence. This is no coincidence; questions of Crashpaddy's motivation and intent are compelling. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to instill a sense a responsibility and maturity in those who repeat the mistakes of the past. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that he is, you might say, overly anxious to pamper the worst kinds of malignant stirrers there are. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further.
Crashpaddy's discourteous, nugatory supporters convince others that antihumanist televangelists are the "chosen people" of scriptural prophecy for no better reason than to be above someone on the social ladder. The same might be said of disruptive, nettlesome troglodytes. Believe it or not, Crashpaddy's perceptions have no redeeming value. That said, let me continue. It would be wrong to imply that Crashpaddy is involved in some kind of conspiracy to turn over our country to vile maggots. It would be wrong because his manuscripts are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but I see how important his neurotic proposed social programs are to his thralls and I laugh. I laugh because far too many people tolerate his complaints as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that Crashpaddy's arguments are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, Crashpaddy argues that he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. To maintain this thesis, Crashpaddy naturally has had to shovel away a mountain of evidence, which he does by the desperate expedient of claiming that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty.
Fortunately, most people understand that most of us insist that Crashpaddy is extremely nit-picky. No joke. He says he's going to hammer away at the characters of all those who will not help him thrust all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments in the immediate years ahead. Good old Crashpaddy. He just loves to open his mouth and let all kinds of things come out without listening to how superstitious they sound. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by his utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that if you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that he would create an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Crashpaddy could have made the same prediction.
If we submit to his definition of "pancreaticoduodenostomy" and become incompetent, we have lost the war for self-preservation, period. How dare he criticize my values when his are so obviously homicidal? Last I checked, we can divide Crashpaddy's hijinks into three categories: featherbrained, mad, and loathsome.
If Crashpaddy has spurred us to search for solutions that are more creative and constructive than the typically catty ones championed by reprehensible supercilious-types, then Crashpaddy may have accomplished a useful thing. Exhibitionism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. If we let Crashpaddy force women to live by restrictive standards not applicable to men, then greed, corruption, and quislingism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock and trade of the media and educational institutions. He says that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. In conclusion, let me just say that Crashpaddy's blind faith in Fabianism leads him only to corruption.
:sleeping:
Oh, and one more thing. Implying that we should avoid personal responsibility is no different from implying that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Crashpaddy's demands. Both statements are ludicrous. There can be no doubt that I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that the main dissensus between me and Crashpaddy is that I claim that it is crystal-clear that it should scarcely seem questionable to anyone that the surest way for Crashpaddy's advocates to succeed is for them to trick our children into adopting unconventional, disapproved-of opinions and ways of life. He, on the other hand, contends that he is a model citizen.
Whenever someone tells him not to make serious dialogue difficult or impossible, Crashpaddy gets all teary-eyed. My, my; how sad. My heart bleeds for him, it really does. To be fair, his prognoses are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. He parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, his ideas will change instantly, like a weathercock.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is neither a document written in anger nor something I am being paid to write. In fact, I have said that to Crashpaddy on many occasions, and I will keep on saying it until he stops trying to subject us to the fork-tongued yapping of self-indulgent, illaudable airheads. As noisome as his pronouncements are, he has shown he's not afraid to be distasteful. Crashpaddy vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would, because it's possible that he doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of demagogism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we shine a light on his efforts to curry favor with imperious vagrants using a barrage of flattery, especially recognition of their "value," their "importance," their "educational mission," and other virulent nonsense.
Already, some judgmental, loquacious sciolists have begun to suppress people's instinct and intellect, and with terrifying and tragic results. What morals will follow from their camp is anyone's guess. But I digress. If one dares to criticize even a single tenet of Crashpaddy's protests, one is promptly condemned as shabby, intransigent, foolhardy, or whatever epithet Crashpaddy deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation.
What's more, he contends that his fairy tales prevent smallpox. Excuse me, but where exactly did this little factoid come from? Crashpaddy's ability to reason from premise to conclusion is nearly non-existent. This applies first and foremost to a group under whose malodorous brand of boosterism the whole of honest humanity is suffering: irritating, craven clueless-types. Isn't it historically demonstrated that Crashpaddy unfairly lambastes people who are trying to do the best they can in a bad situation? I ask, because everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that his stooges argue that barbaric firebrands are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. These are the same power-hungry tricksters who insult my intelligence. This is no coincidence; questions of Crashpaddy's motivation and intent are compelling. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to instill a sense a responsibility and maturity in those who repeat the mistakes of the past. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that he is, you might say, overly anxious to pamper the worst kinds of malignant stirrers there are. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further.
Crashpaddy's discourteous, nugatory supporters convince others that antihumanist televangelists are the "chosen people" of scriptural prophecy for no better reason than to be above someone on the social ladder. The same might be said of disruptive, nettlesome troglodytes. Believe it or not, Crashpaddy's perceptions have no redeeming value. That said, let me continue. It would be wrong to imply that Crashpaddy is involved in some kind of conspiracy to turn over our country to vile maggots. It would be wrong because his manuscripts are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but I see how important his neurotic proposed social programs are to his thralls and I laugh. I laugh because far too many people tolerate his complaints as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that Crashpaddy's arguments are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, Crashpaddy argues that he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. To maintain this thesis, Crashpaddy naturally has had to shovel away a mountain of evidence, which he does by the desperate expedient of claiming that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty.
Fortunately, most people understand that most of us insist that Crashpaddy is extremely nit-picky. No joke. He says he's going to hammer away at the characters of all those who will not help him thrust all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments in the immediate years ahead. Good old Crashpaddy. He just loves to open his mouth and let all kinds of things come out without listening to how superstitious they sound. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by his utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that if you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that he would create an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Crashpaddy could have made the same prediction.
If we submit to his definition of "pancreaticoduodenostomy" and become incompetent, we have lost the war for self-preservation, period. How dare he criticize my values when his are so obviously homicidal? Last I checked, we can divide Crashpaddy's hijinks into three categories: featherbrained, mad, and loathsome.
If Crashpaddy has spurred us to search for solutions that are more creative and constructive than the typically catty ones championed by reprehensible supercilious-types, then Crashpaddy may have accomplished a useful thing. Exhibitionism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. If we let Crashpaddy force women to live by restrictive standards not applicable to men, then greed, corruption, and quislingism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock and trade of the media and educational institutions. He says that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. In conclusion, let me just say that Crashpaddy's blind faith in Fabianism leads him only to corruption.
:sleeping:
