NationStates Jolt Archive

I want to share with you a very deep concern I have about Sen. John Kerry. To begin at the beginning, I want to challenge Sen. Kerry's fickle assumptions about merit. I want to do this not because I need to tack another line onto my résumé, but because this is a free country, and I insist we ought to keep it that way. To be honest, his outrage at complaints about him is indicative of his self-esteem and value system. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that Sen. Kerry is almost unique among insensitive freaks of nature in that he espouses a detestable view of reality and a defense of infantile obscurantism. Let's remember that.

There is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Sen. Kerry and his apparatchiks started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to devalue me as a person. Not yet, at least. But you should not ask, "Where are the people who are willing to stand up and acknowledge that homophobic cowards are the lowest form of human life?", but rather, "Is Sen. Kerry just trying to diminish society's inducements to good behavior?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because he coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his flimflams sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. Sen. Kerry says that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. But then he turns around and says that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. You know, you can't have it both ways, Sen. Kerry.

It is imperative that all of us in this community make a genuine contribution to human society. This cannot occur unless there is a true spirit of respect and an appreciation of differences. I want to talk about the big picture: whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may replace today's chaos and lack of vision with order and a supreme sense of purpose and, as the alternative, the cuckoo and prolix dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Sen. Kerry. Choose carefully, because Sen. Kerry's perspective is that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. My perspective, in contrast, is that Sen. Kerry wants to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide Bonapartism. Who does he think he is? I mean, his words all stem from one, simple, faulty premise -- that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding.

I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, Sen. Kerry will abuse science by using it as a mechanism of ideology because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses goofy geeks of one sort or another with lousy and uncontrollable rage. As far as I'm concerned, my general thesis is that you might have heard the story that he once agreed to help us rage, rage against the dying of the light. No one has located the document in which Sen. Kerry said that. No one has identified when or where Sen. Kerry said that. That's because he never said it. As you might have suspected, Sen. Kerry maintains that either he is merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live or that his strictures are Right with a capital R. Sen. Kerry denies any other possibility. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Sen. Kerry and his shills, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that if Sen. Kerry's shell games get any more impertinent, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep.

Let Sen. Kerry's meretricious prognoses stand as evidence that the baleful influence of neopaganism is plainly evident in the palpable one-sidedness of Sen. Kerry's press releases. I mean, think about it. Sen. Kerry wants us to believe that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else. How stupid does he think we are? A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, he wants nothing less than to exhibit cruelty to animals, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his brain-damaged, uninformed claims. Viewed from all angles, he has warned us that in a matter of days, the most deplorable bums you'll ever see will implement a peevish parody of justice called "Sen. Kerry-ism". If you think about it, you'll realize that Sen. Kerry's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that Sen. Kerry tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. This is abject phallocentrism! Only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to contribute to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. But the first step is to acknowledge that he uses the term "anticonstitutionally" with ostensible confidence that its meaning is universally understood. Sen. Kerry's acolytes probably don't realize that, because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, he hates people who have huge supplies of the things he lacks. What Sen. Kerry lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that he has announced his intentions to impose a "glass ceiling" that limits our opportunities for promotions in most jobs. While doing so may earn Sen. Kerry a gold star from the mush-for-brains gnosticism crowd, I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that he is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.

Once again, Sen. Kerry likes to promote a culture of dependency and failure. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Sen. Kerry and his cronies 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 encourage individuals to come out of their cocoons and flourish. His agitprop machine is running at full throttle. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that just because he and his apostles don't like being labelled as "lame-brained boors" or "incorrigible, cocky dissemblers" doesn't mean the shoe doesn't fit. However daft the national picture already is, Sen. Kerry's vituperations command as much respect as the tales in the supermarket tabloids. An equal but opposite observation is that Sen. Kerry is stepping over the line when he attempts to eliminate those law-enforcement officers who constitute the vital protective bulwark in the fragile balance between anarchy and tyranny -- way over the line.

Show me where it says he has the right to commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones. The picture I am presenting need not be confined to Sen. Kerry's hastily mounted campaigns. It applies to everything he says and does.

Forgive me for boring you with all the gory details, but Sen. Kerry is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead. Although it requires risk, commitment, and follow-through to begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action, many people are convinced that he has a certain fondness for intrusive, unrestrained bozos. I can't comment on that, but I can say that if Sen. Kerry is victorious in his quest to hijack the word "saccharomucilaginous" and use it to let us know exactly what our attitudes should be towards various types of people and behavior, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity. Looking at it another way, any rational argument must acknowledge this. His whiney announcements, naturally, do not.

Sen. Kerry has let his lofty-yet-rancorous views cloud his sense of taste and reality. To a lesser degree and on a smaller scale, Sen. Kerry's ramblings are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. Let's consider for a moment, though, that maybe according to him, anyone who points this out is guilty of spreading lies, smears, and tribalism. Then doesn't it follow that his goals coalesce with those of contemptible kleptomaniacs? When one examines the ramifications of letting him purge the land of every non-villainous person, gene, idea, and influence, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that loud deconstructionism has long been the nucleus of his grievances. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Sen. Kerry has any control over. But that's inconsequential, because it strikes me as amusing that Sen. Kerry complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. Sen. Kerry operates on an international scale to address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. It's only fitting, therefore, that we, too, work on an international scale, but to introduce an important, but underrepresented, angle on Sen. Kerry's insidious dissertations. I'm not saying this to be antihumanist, but rather to explain that "laughable", "tyrannical", and "unsavory" seem the most appropriate adjectives to describe his notions, and everyone with half a brain understands that.

I don't know when imperialism became chic, but all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of Sen. Kerry's addlepated outbursts. They are not a cause; they are an effect. How many of Sen. Kerry's followers are content to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world around them? I'd hazard to guess that the number is pretty high. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that by letting Sen. John Kerry silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming, we are playing a loser's game.

I would like to challenge everyone who wants to write something about John Kerry or any other character to realize the election is OVER. Bush WON, you can STOP NOW

Some questions:

1. Did you copy and paste this?

2. What is the point of this opinion piece?

3. Do you expect to be taken seriously with this many personal attacks based on absolutely no substantial facts, quotes, or accounts?

I don't think I've ever seen a rant use more two dollars words to say absolutely nothing in my entire life. In fact, through the haze of pretentious language I can barely see what you're even so upset with Mr. Kerry about. Silencing critical debate? Spare me your martyrdom. The fact that you are able to post this self-important ego trip 10 months after Mr. Kerry has fallen from relevancy says to me that your ability to engage in critical debate has not been silenced. I would now invite you to get over your distaste of Mr. Kerry, as he is no longer on the public radar, and the only people who ought to worry about him are the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

What is your point? Are they suddenly having a new election next week?

In fact, it was all very Kerry-esque, lots of hoo-haa and polish but no real point or substance. Maybe you're angry at him because he stole your writing style and turned it into his campaign speeches?

We're supposed to shut up and smile when Sdaeriji says clueless things? A knowledge of correct diction, even if unused, evinces a superiority that covers cowardice or stupidity? We can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune? These are all claims made recently by Sdaeriji. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that the last time I told Sdaeriji's myrmidons that I want to convince the government to clamp down hard on Sdaeriji's endeavors, they declared in response, "But Sdaeriji's threats enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness." Of course, they didn't use exactly those words, but that's exactly what they meant. In an atmosphere of false rumors and misinformation, I've tried explaining to his spokesmen that pretending to be a victim is his rash attempt to change the course of history, 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. There is absolutely nothing these soporific clunks will not do to destroy their enemies. They will poke into the most secret family affairs and not rest until their truffle-searching instinct digs up some tendentious incident that is calculated to finish off their unfortunate victim.

Someone needs to weaken the critical links in Sdaeriji's nexus of intolerant Jacobinism. Who's going to do it? Sdaeriji? I think not.

Though dastardly vigilantism is not discussed in this letter, much of what I've written applies to that, as well. His refrains are as devoid of meaning as the squawk of an angry bluejay -- and Sdaeriji knows it. In spite of all he has done, I must admit I really like the guy. No, just kidding. Actually, I respect the English language and believe in the use of words as a means of communication. Rude deadbeats like him, however, consider spoken communication as merely a set of noises uttered to excite emotions in frowzy control freaks in order to convince them to eliminate those law-enforcement officers who constitute the vital protective bulwark in the fragile balance between anarchy and tyranny. If I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that anyone who resists Sdaeriji deserves to be crushed. In fact, that's exactly what Sdaeriji does as part of his quest to create a regime of insecure paternalism.

We don't need to demonize him; Sdaeriji is already a demon, and furthermore, if he opened his eyes, he'd realize that his desire to exert more and more control over other individuals is incontrovertible evidence that Sdaeriji harbors some hypocritical grudges. How many of his helpers are content to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world around them? I'd hazard to guess that the number is pretty high.

I don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to address the real issues faced by mankind, because doing so clearly demonstrates how I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of his writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Sdaeriji's writings to know that I can guarantee the readers of this letter that 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 if you can go more than a minute without hearing Sdaeriji talk about authoritarianism, you're either deaf, dumb, or in a serious case of denial. Sdaeriji wants nothing less than to practice human sacrifice on a grand scale in some sort of disaffected death cult, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his misguided perceptions. In closing, we must work together to reveal the truth about Sdaeriji's sentiments. Together, we can make a difference. Forever and always.

:D

I assume you are using the find and replace function in word, but who did that second essay originally refer to?

I assume you are using the find and replace function in word, but who did that second essay originally refer to?

Sdaeriji and about word, no.

You want to play use ten dollar words and ihatevacationesque semi-comprehendable diction? Well, I guess I can join the debate. Your first long winded rant about apparently gibberish is a good deal late, the election ended some time ago and is no longer relevant. Hell, one of your more coherent attacks on Kerry (assumnig you arn't stealing essays from other people, which is a major assumption) was based on something I have never even heard of, which suggests that you are abusing find and replace in word.

Your second equally long winded attack on Sdarji, or whatever the devil the name is, was pointless ranting. Who writes that much just to criticise some one on a short paragraph counter to the original long winded bunk? No one that's who - in fact, I would like the link to the website for your "long-winded insult generator". If your whole point in this is to look like a pompous ass doing an impression of the hindenburg, you won.

please say that again in 100 words or less.

and please tell us who really wrote it and when. its not polite to use someone else's words without crediting them.

If you are stimulated by new ideas, and if you can think for yourself rather than simply accept what [NS] Ihatevacations dishes out, I think you will find this letter of interest. Let me begin by citing a range of examples from the public sphere. For starters, many people are convinced that whenever Ihatevacations encounters a free-thinking individual who presents factual data that conflicts with Ihatevacations's beliefs, he doesn't know what to do. I can't comment on that, but I can say that if Ihatevacations can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals, then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to lead the way to the future, not to the past. I was thinking about how it is impracticable to draw an accurate portrait of his ideological alignment without exploiting the inner unity of our national will. And then it hit me.

A desire to wear a cloak of status and prestige is the only explanation for Ihatevacations's otherwise inexplicable behavior. Although others may disagree with that claim, few would dispute that Ihatevacations has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of Ihatevacations's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. It's scummy for him to desecrate personal religious objects. Or perhaps I should say, it's mindless. Ihatevacations serves as a conduit that carries the élan vital of faddism. And while we're on the subject, in a recent essay, Ihatevacations stated that he has a "special" perspective on chauvinism which carries with it a "special" right to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly untoward agendas. Since the arguments he made in the rest of his essay are based in part on that assumption, he should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but his effusions were never about tolerance and equality. That was just window dressing for the "innocents". Rather, my cause is to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. I call upon men and women from all walks of life to support my cause with their life-affirming eloquence and indomitable spirit of human decency and moral righteousness. Only then will the whole world realize that even when the facts don't fit, Ihatevacations sometimes tries to use them anyway. He still maintains, for instance, that he is merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live.

Because I am interested in facts, not in paregoric for Ihatevacations's goombahs, because he is so dead wrong on the issue of conformism that nothing else he says or does can possibly compensate for his views on that issue, and because his long-term stratagems of infiltration and mass propaganda have been so successful that Ihatevacations can now fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd, we can conclude that I recently heard Ihatevacations tell a bunch of people that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. It is no news that I myself pray for the day when those who ruin people's lives will see what they're doing to the world and to all of its citizens. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Tactless Rhetoric. In the meantime, Ihatevacations is absolutely determined to believe that cacodemonic practitioners of alcoholism and raucous, judgmental misogynists should rule this country, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. When I say that human life is full of artificiality, perversion, and misery, much of which is caused by the most larcenous nitwits you'll ever see, I consider this to mean that Ihatevacations extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice.

For reasons which I will adumbrate presently, he should focus more on the quality of his writing than on the amount of drivel he can squeeze in. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Ihatevacations presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors lecherous, slimy dorks. And here we have the ultimate irony, because it's his belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to hurt others physically or emotionally. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a loathsome idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that as our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the sorts of people Ihatevacations preys upon.

Ihatevacations has no idea what he's doing. So what's the connection between that and Ihatevacations's analects? The connection is that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, nutty firebrands (like Ihatevacations) are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, we must maximize our individual potential for effectiveness and success in combatting Ihatevacations. Only then can a society free of his rotten hariolations blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that by allowing him to sell otherwise perfectly reasonable people the idée fixe that he does the things he does "for the children", we are allowing him to play puppet master. Ihatevacations's pernicious accusations leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? I can give you only my best estimate, made after long and anxious consideration, but I do not pose as an expert in these matters. I can say only that when I first became aware of his covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how it has long been obvious to attentive observers that the absurdity of his propositions did not dawn on me until I realized that this view dangerously underestimates the scary quality of egotism. But did you know that innocent children have been brainwashed by Ihatevacations's soulless values? Ihatevacations doesn't want you to know that, because people often get the impression that frightful, presumptuous suborners of perjury and Ihatevacations's subordinates are separate entities. Not so. When one catches cold, the other sneezes. As proof, note that Ihatevacations's maneuvers symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion -- extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom. Some will say I exaggerate, but, actually, I'm being quite lenient. I didn't mention, for example, that you have my word that the hate just keeps on coming. No joke. That's our situation today, in very rough outline. Of course, I've left out a thousand details and refinements and qualifications. I've not mentioned that for [NS] Ihatevacations, incendiarism is the name of the game. And I've ignored Comstockism altogether. I've simply pointed out one key fact: We must shake off our torpor, ignore the siren songs of imperialism, and exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum.

I assume you are using the find and replace function in word
My vote goes towards an essay generator.
I found a similarly-styled block of text to part of it over here (http://bbs.buccaneers.com/showpost.php?p=1658686&postcount=67) .
Another bit seems to be almost identical to some stuff that can be found all over the web if one searches for "There is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature."
It may be from an address by somebody calling himself "Revilo P. Oliver", that is excerpted on Stormfront, which happens to be the first result and be the only one of them that looks as though it is something actual rather than a generated essay.

Many other bits will turn up in other places on the internet if one removes Kerry's name and Googles.

Ekland Post 1: 1803 words (3 pages)

Ekland Post 2: 670 words (2 pages)


Just in case you were wondering why it is people aren't appreciating your posts. Is there any way you could, I don't know, be a bit more concise? I assure you it is possible to get one's point accross without writing a dissertation. And in the end that makes things easier on you and on us.

Ekland Post 1: 1803 words (3 pages)

Ekland Post 2: 670 words (2 pages)


Just in case you were wondering why it is people aren't appreciating your posts. Is there any way you could, I don't know, be a bit more concise? I assure you it is possible to get one's point accross without writing a dissertation. And in the end that makes things easier on you and on us.
He is using some sort of modified generator to insult us

Some questions:

1. Did you copy and paste this?


I think it is from the automatic complaint generator (cannot remember the link though :()

I think it is from the automatic complaint generator (cannot remember the link though :()

Oh ok, I'll tell.

I'm using Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. (http://www.pakin.org/complaint) I decided against posting a link originally because quite frankly, it would totally spoil the effect.

So ya... have fun. :D

I think it is from the automatic complaint generator (cannot remember the link though :()
It seems quite similar in style to this one (http://www.pakin.org/complaint/), but it seems to make a bit more sense.

EDIT:
Ah, Ekland spilled the beans before I posted.

Ah, Ekland spilled the beans before I posted.

Ya, I really wanted to see how many people would take it seriously, I got a laugh out of some of the responces. Making them for posters here was a plus.

So ya, make your own. Have fun.

Oh ok, I'll tell.

I'm using Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. (http://www.pakin.org/complaint) I decided against posting a link originally because quite frankly, it would totally spoil the effect.

So ya... have fun. :D

WHAT AN ASSHOLE!

Note : Nice work :D

I'm using Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. I decided against posting a link originally because quite frankly, it would totally spoil the effect.
You little..... :p

You little..... :p

Muahahahahahahaha... :p

It amazes me that people were so ready to bash the originator of this thread. Anyone who wasn't aware of the tomfoolery after the first post should have been after the poster's 2nd post. We're too quick to jump into partisan-mode sometimes to appreciate satire or self-parody when we see it.

Us liberals are supposed to be the laid back ones, and yet sometimes our voices are the most shrill.

I say we rise up against the partisans. Partisanship is unAmerican. Those partisans don't know what they are doing, and they are tearing apart America. The press is made up of partisans. The government is made up of partisans. In fact, I suspect that there is a giant partisan conspiracy out there. Those partisans stand between us and everything we hold dear.

Join me in seperating ourselves from the dreaded threat of partisanship. Partisans need not apply!

Ihatevacations']I would like to challenge everyone who wants to write something about John Kerry or any other character to realize the election is OVER. Bush WON, you can STOP NOW
Seriously. It's over, he ain't coming back, let it go. Thankfully someone else realizes this.

How deliciously evil...!

Seriously. It's over, he ain't coming back, let it go. Thankfully someone else realizes this.

Speaking of speaking out against something that is already over...

Ihatevacations']I would like to challenge everyone who wants to write something about John Kerry or any other character to realize the election is OVER. Bush WON, you can STOP NOWI don't see why people can't talk about him. He is still an elected official after all. People talk plenty about both of senators, even when those people are out of state. Pennsylvania is an annoying state to live in between Arlen Spector and Rick Strotum

It is imperative that all of us in this community make a genuine contribution to human society. This cannot occur unless there is a true spirit of respect and an appreciation of differences.

We don't need to demonize him; Sdaeriji is already a demon, and furthermore, if he opened his eyes, he'd realize that his desire to exert more and more control over other individuals is incontrovertible evidence that Sdaeriji harbors some hypocritical grudges. How many of his helpers are content to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world around them? I'd hazard to guess that the number is pretty high.

Methinks thou doth protest too much?

I think I have to agree with Sdaeriji’s words:

I don't think I've ever seen a rant use more two dollars words to say absolutely nothing in my entire life.

It amazes me that people were so ready to bash the originator of this thread. Anyone who wasn't aware of the tomfoolery after the first post should have been after the poster's 2nd post. We're too quick to jump into partisan-mode sometimes to appreciate satire or self-parody when we see it.

Us liberals are supposed to be the laid back ones, and yet sometimes our voices are the most shrill.

I say we rise up against the partisans. Partisanship is unAmerican. Those partisans don't know what they are doing, and they are tearing apart America. The press is made up of partisans. The government is made up of partisans. In fact, I suspect that there is a giant partisan conspiracy out there. Those partisans stand between us and everything we hold dear.

Join me in seperating ourselves from the dreaded threat of partisanship. Partisans need not apply!
Naw.....the originator deserves the fly on the windshield treatment. :eek:

Since Skerry will never have another credible chance of running for prez again, unless you live in Taxachusetts you can forget about him. Bastard he may be, but paying this much attention to him now is just silly.

Methinks thou doth protest too much?

I think I have to agree with Sdaeriji’s words:

Methinks thou needth to pull thine head from thine own ass. :rolleyes:

What part of it being a randomly generated post don't you understand? I didn't write or even read the fucking thing. All it needed was a name and a number of paragraphs.

Oh ok, I'll tell.

I'm using Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. (http://www.pakin.org/complaint) I decided against posting a link originally because quite frankly, it would totally spoil the effect.

So ya... have fun. :D
Congratulations. You’ve managed to impress me. I’m going to bookmark that sight.

Check this out too

http://www.echalk.co.uk/amusements/OpticalIllusions/colourPerception/colourPerception.html

It amazes me that people were so ready to bash the originator of this thread. Anyone who wasn't aware of the tomfoolery after the first post should have been after the poster's 2nd post. We're too quick to jump into partisan-mode sometimes to appreciate satire or self-parody when we see it.

Us liberals are supposed to be the laid back ones, and yet sometimes our voices are the most shrill.

I say we rise up against the partisans. Partisanship is unAmerican. Those partisans don't know what they are doing, and they are tearing apart America. The press is made up of partisans. The government is made up of partisans. In fact, I suspect that there is a giant partisan conspiracy out there. Those partisans stand between us and everything we hold dear.

Join me in seperating ourselves from the dreaded threat of partisanship. Partisans need not apply!

Unfortunately, I'd just left for work when he posted his second post, so I'm just now discovering what was going on. It's amusing.

Ihatevacations']I would like to challenge everyone who wants to write something about John Kerry or any other character to realize the election is OVER. Bush WON, you can STOP NOW
Why does this have to be about an election? I don't think this is rubbing it in, as much fun as that would be. Why can't we just despise Kerry and other pols for their own disingenuousness and demagoguery?

As long as those dopes keep making statements to the media, they're fair game.

Why does this have to be about an election? I don't think this is rubbing it in, as much fun as that would be. Why can't we just despise Kerry and other pols for their own disingenuousness and demagoguery?

As long as those dopes keep making statements to the media, they're fair game.

I'm glad the "taking this too seriously" crowd is composed of all parts of the political spectrum.

Does no one RTFT?

It's like we've evolved out of flinging poo physically only to fling it verbally.

That's okay, I'll just be the chimp in the corner, smoking a cigarette and laughing at you all.

I want to share with you a few of the tentative conclusions I've reached regarding Ekland's philippics. And I stress the word "tentative," because the subject of what motivates Ekland is tricky and complex. To get right down to it, if this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this letter's role is much greater than just to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. I have begged his allies to step forth and foster mutual understanding. To date, not a single soul has agreed to help in this fashion. Are they worried about how Ekland might retaliate? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that Ekland's arguments are full of hair-splitting, lawyer-like quibbling, and references to obscure authorities. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: How far do Ekland's lies extend? Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that if I had my druthers, Ekland would never have had the opportunity to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror. As it stands, if you ever ask Ekland to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. We should note, of course, that what I've written about Ekland doesn't prove anything in itself. It's only suggestive, but it does make a good point that I recently informed Ekland that his grunts leach integrity and honor from our souls. Ekland said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further; after all, he has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but there are two sorts of people in this world. There are those who diminish our will to live, and there are those who improve the physical and spiritual quality of life for the population at present and for those yet to come. Ekland fits neatly into the former category, of course.

My general thesis is that Ekland seizes every opportunity to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that Ekland's most progressive idea is to perpetuate harmful stereotypes. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: Some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that it's time for him to face the music. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation. I wonder if Ekland really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? To turn that question around, what is it about our society that makes blathering anthropophagi like Ekland desire to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds? The answer is quite simple. I already listed several possibilities, but because Ekland lacks the ability to remember beyond the last two seconds of his life, I will restate what I said before, for his sake: It will not be easy to protect innocent, little children from obtuse confused-types like him. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that, for the overriding reason that this is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact. We must snap Ekland's trucklers out of their trance. Our children depend on that. Ekland may not be that morally crippled, but he sure is delusional. His opuscula may have been conceived in idealism, but they quickly degenerated into antihumanist anti-intellectualism. He accuses me of being hate-filled, yet it is he who is filled with hate. And he accuses me of being bigoted, while his writings show nothing but bigotry. Why does Ekland make those sorts of accusations, then? You know the answer, don't you? You probably also know that Ekland will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let him conceal information and, occasionally, blatantly lie. At least putting up with another Ekland hissy fit is easier than convincing Ekland's secret police that Ekland's imprecations are not our only concern. To state the matter in a few words, I shall not argue that Ekland's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate, but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. Read them and see for yourself.

I would like to put forth the possibility that if I didn't think Ekland would develop a credible pretext to forcibly silence his opponents, I wouldn't say that his adherents feel that "Ekland's Ponzi schemes provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything." First off, that's a lousy sentence. If they had written that it's about time for Ekland to pay the piper, then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, some people think it's a bit extreme of me to speak up and speak out against Ekland -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that Ekland is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, his willingness to torment, harry, and persecute anyone who crosses his path sets a new world record for brazenness. Your guess is as good as mine as to why Ekland wants to rip apart causes that others feel strongly about. Maybe it's because he plans to tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions. We can divide his screeds into three categories: mischievous, brutish, and vengeful. To be sure, he has deported himself as an enemy of peace and harmony, but what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of a jaded wacko. It's a fact.

It's a well-known fact that in the genesis of Ekland's circulars, uncivilized begat baleful, which begat impetuous, which begat frightful. It's an equally well-known fact that Ekland is one of the most blatant enemies of peace, stability, and human progress the world has ever seen. When logic puts these two facts together, the necessary result is an understanding that vandalism, death threats, and slander are typical tactics used by Ekland's chums. Yes, I could add that his henchmen must be exposed and neutralized wherever they lurk, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that Ekland is up to, the more shocking things, things like how he wants to needle and wheedle the most blockish nutters you'll ever see into his faction. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but inasmuch as I disagree with his accusations and find his ad hominem attacks offensive, I am happy to meet his speech with more speech and, if necessary, continue this discussion until the truth shines. Ekland, as usual, you prove yourself to be ostentatious. He doesn't want us to provide you with vital information which he has gone to great lengths to prevent you from discovering. He would rather we settle for the meatless bone of parasitism.

There are no two ways about it; his assistants actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these classes of obtrusive judgmental-types are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "historiographical". In reality, of course, Ekland has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and incite racial hatred -- all by trumping up a phony emergency. I am not fooled by his bitter and eristic rhetoric. I therefore gladly accept the responsibility of notifying others that in order to declare a truce with Ekland and commence a dialogue, we must expose his teachings for what they really are. And that's just the first step. Remember, Ekland recently went through an irrationalism phase in which he tried repeatedly to toy with our opinions. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that this makes Ekland's belief systems seem paltry and even a bit ghastly. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement, but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation. I discussed this topic in a previous letter, so I will not go into great detail now, but Ekland is absolutely determined to believe that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. He either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. Ekland even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs.

Make special note of that point, because he sometimes uses the word "counterrevolutionist" when describing his tirades. Beware! This is a buzzword designed for emotional response. I can't possibly believe Ekland's claim that inhumane spielers are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll eat my hat. Heck, I'll eat a whole closetful of hats. That's a pretty safe bet, because Ekland would have us believe that he is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject.

I undoubtedly hope that his exegeses were intended as a joke, although they're not very funny if they were. If I want to die in oppression, chaos, and despair, that should be my prerogative. I undeniably don't need Ekland forcing me to. Statements like, "There is not a single word in that sentence that he can take exception to" accurately express the feelings of most of us here. For those of you who don't know, you, of course, now need some hard evidence that the ideological underpinnings of Ekland's vaporings have struck a receptive chord among thousands of self-aggrandizing braggadocios. Well, how about this for evidence: If history follows its course, it should be evident that we must fight to the end for our ideas and ideals in such as way that there is nothing he can do about it except learn to live with the fait accompli. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that when a mistake is made, the smart thing to do is to admit it and reverse course. That takes real courage. The way that Ekland stubbornly refuses to own up to his mistakes serves only to convince me that you should not ask, "Why does he want to give the worst types of two-faced bimbos I've ever seen far more credibility than they deserve?", but rather, "Why doesn't he try doing something constructive for once in his life?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because it seems that no one else is telling you that his apologues are not just about fetishism but also about faddism. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, Ekland's filthy conclusions leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? It's an interesting question, and its examination will help us understand how Ekland's mind works. Let me start by providing evidence that misoneism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. If natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species, then Ekland is clearly going to be the first to go. At the risk of sounding hopelessly prudish, I would like to comment on his attempt to associate mandarinism with cameralism. There is no association.

By now, the reader has discerned that Ekland should show some class. So let me just add that his ramblings are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition". Funny, that was the same term that Ekland's votaries once used to transform our society into a satanic war machine. He says that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life.

You don't have to say anything specifically about Ekland for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should investigate his shallow principles, ideals, and objectives. He knows perfectly well that a recent fact-finder's report revealed that condescending kooks and anti-democratic ignoramuses will join forces before you know it to ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women. Ekland vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would, because in public, he vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, he never fails to encourage crass harijans to see themselves as victims and, therefore, live by alibis rather than by honest effort.

This may be a foregone conclusion, but he believes that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one. Ten years ago, it was psychotic nutcases. Today, it's feeble-minded pinheads who engulf the world in a dense miasma of defeatism. While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: Ekland can't throw away his integrity and expect the world to respect him for it.