My new favorite thing
Automatically generate humorous complaint letters. Just tell it whom to complain about, and the automatic complaint-letter generator will do the rest. A different letter every time!
www.pakin.org
Me too.
My goal for this letter is to operate on today's real—not tomorrow's ideal—political terrain. I shall do this in the only honest way that I can, which is by simply setting forth those principles that I personally believe in and that I personally observe and honor. But before I continue, allow me to explain that Mr. Dirtman refuses to come to terms with reality. He prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination.
Sometimes, I think that all of us are partially to blame for Mr. Dirtman's distasteful treacheries. The smallness of our politics, the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions, and our preference for scoring cheap political points instead of rolling up our sleeves and addressing the real issues faced by mankind all help pave the way for Mr. Dirtman to promote mediocrity over merit. He cannot be tamed by “tolerance” and “accommodation” but is actually spurred on by such gestures. Mr. Dirtman sees such gestures as a sign of weakness on our part and is thereby encouraged to continue allowing federally funded research to mushroom into an impudent, grossly inefficient system, hampered by inarticulate cheeseparers and unpatriotic smut peddlers. To have the audacity to say that “invidious rovers”—and let's be clear that he's referring here to his castigators—are incabable of analyzing Mr. Dirtman's objectives in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion is, in my opinion, nothing short of callous. I must ask that his apostles urge lawmakers to pass a nonbinding resolution affirming that by next weekend, he will order his menials to rob from the rich but—unlike Robin Hood—give to treacherous, spleenful degenerates. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to discredit and intimidate the opposition. I know very few footling big-mouths personally, but I know them well enough to surmise that there is no place in this country where we are safe from Mr. Dirtman's toadies, no place where we are not targeted for hatred and attack.
Some drossy smart alecks have raised objections to my traducements but their objections are all politically motivated. Mr. Dirtman will do anything to prevent us from critiquing his piteous apologues. Don't apologues that aim to combine the most sordid avarice with the most invincible hatred of the very people who tolerate and enrich Mr. Dirtman deserve—and in some sense, require—abundant critique and evaluation? That's why I propose that we take Mr. Dirtman to task for outraging the very sensibilities of those who value freedom and fairness, mainly because he wants to prevent us from providing equal opportunities for everyone, regardless of circumstances at birth. If he manages to do that, he'll have plenty of time to focus on his core mission: baking us a cake of antagonism, filled with revisionism and topped with a layer of colonialism.
There's only one true drama queen around here, and Mr. Dirtman is the one wearing the crown. There isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that Mr. Dirtman acts in the public interest, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Mr. Dirtman's from the get-go. Get this: He claims that he can override nature. [One minute break for laughter.] Whew! That's the funniest thing I've heard in weeks. Seriously, though, if Mr. Dirtman had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages “before technocracy” he wouldn't be so keen to obliterate our sense of identity. Maybe he'd even begin to realize that in some sense, his twisted dream of saddling the economy with crippling debt has triumphed. Of course, this would better be called a nightmare, not a dream. In point of contrast, I'm one of those people who dreams about pointing the high-powered fire hose of truth at Mr. Dirtman's neurotic soliloquies to wash away their multiple layers of irreligionism. That's why I write that we must maintain the great principles of virtue, truth, right, and honor if we are ever to wage war on Trotskyism. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must surely pursue because Mr. Dirtman is typical of peccable rantipoles in his wild invocations to the irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his misdeeds.
Where are the solid statistics that prove that anyone who dares to serve on the side of Truth can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result? I've never seen any. Yet, we can't stop Mr. Dirtman overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to use evidence-based arguments when discussing issues with Mr. Dirtman. Mr. Dirtman is able to argue only from emotionalism. He doesn't argue from a logical, linear point of view. Hence, by taking on Mr. Dirtman at his false premises one can easily demonstrate that he always looks the other way when one of his satellites gets it in his head to perpetuate what we all know is a corrupt system. Apparently, the principle laid down by Jean-Marie Collot d'Herbois during the French Reign of Terror still holds true today:
Tout est permis à quiconque agit dans le sens de la révolution.
Think about that for a moment. Mr. Dirtman likes to seem smarter than he really is. It therefore always amuses me whenever he cracks open a thesaurus, aims for intellectualism, misses, and lands squarely in a puddle of headlong frippery. The great irony is that he says that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. Such verbal gems teach us that Mr. Dirtman has recently brought a large number of computer hackers into his klatch of sappy, foul-mouthed blowhards. I proclaim that his goal is to engineer cyber-warfare breaches aimed at attacking his traducers and anyone else who asserts that prudence is no vice. Cowardice—especially Mr. Dirtman's wayward form of it—is.
Mr. Dirtman likes raiding the public till, which puts him somewhere between a supercilious muttonhead and a fastuous, quasi-quarrelsome bosthoon on the poststructuralism org chart. If you've ever watched television or read a book, odds are that you already know that he sometimes puts himself in charge of feeding information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly disruptive agendas. At other times, one of his zealots is deputed for the job. In either case, with Mr. Dirtman so forcefully propounding ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright ageism, things are starting to come to a head. That's why we must convince even sadistic momes that my contempt for Mr. Dirtman is boundless. This is not a matter of perception but of concrete, material reality.
Whenever I highlight the threat of bookish Marxism in a letter such as this, Mr. Dirtman issues a standard response. First, he denies the threat itself. Then, he condemns those who describe it as unsavory plotters. This is basically Mr. Dirtman's way of placing our freedoms under more sustained and subtle attack than at any time in recorded history. He preys on the rebellious and disenfranchised, tricking them into joining his conformism movement. Their first assignment usually involves turning positions of leadership into positions of complacency. The lesson to draw from this is that Mr. Dirtman insists that he answers to no one. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject.
While I trust that this audience shares my indignation at Mr. Dirtman, I recently stated that Mr. Dirtman's vaporings are a relic of an uninformed past. I had considered my comment to be fairly anodyne, but Mr. Dirtman went into quite a swivet over it. I guess if he found that sort of comment offensive, he should undeniably cover his ears when I state that we desperately need to build an inclusive, nondiscriminatory movement for social and political change. It's not enough merely to keep our heads down and pray that Mr. Dirtman doesn't bar workers from participation in the social totality as fully developing individuals. As I like to say, if you set the bar low, you jump low.
Mr. Dirtman wants to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to McCarthyism. I don't even want to know what horrors await this nation if he were to do that, but I do know that I deeply believe that it's within our grasp to put to rest improvident and goofy artifices such as Mr. Dirtman's and encourage others to do the same. Be grateful for this first and last tidbit of comforting news. The rest of this letter will center around the way that he's clearly proud of himself for conconcting such a “brilliant” scheme for engaging in the trafficking of human beings. In my opinion, however, that's the worst idea in the long, sad history of bad ideas. Much better would be to put inexorable pressure on Mr. Dirtman to be a bit more careful about what he says and does. Perhaps it would be more practical to turn his morally repugnant campaigns of malice and malignity to our advantage, but I should remind you that I, speaking as someone who is not an atrabilious sophister, have an intense dislike of foul calumniators. Fortunately, foul calumniators don't normally abuse science by using it as a mechanism of ideology. Mr. Dirtman, in contrast, does little else, which leads me to believe that his cruel platitudes betray his puerile imbecility. More emphatically, whenever Mr. Dirtman is blamed for conspiring to engage in or goad others into engaging in illegal acts, he blames his vassals. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help Mr. Dirtman intensify race hatred. And now I'm finished. Enough time wasted on that, eh?