Quote (FML @ Jan 5 2010 07:08pm)
While no statement I'm about to make should be construed as suggesting or recommending that any person commit an illegal act of any kind, you should realize that Mr. Steve69's rhetorical performances could profitably be deconstructed in a Dishonest Use of Language class. You may be disappointed to hear that my concrete suggestions on how to listen to others are sprinkled throughout this letter like raisins in a pudding, not grouped together in a single block of text at the end. This was a conscious decision I made based on the observation that Steve69 is absolutely determined to believe that he can make all of our problems go away merely by sprinkling some sort of magic, pink, pixie dust over everything that he considers aberrant or vainglorious, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. He has come up with proven methods to make people suspicious of those who speak the truth. All you have to do is let your guard down.
Everywhere he's gone, Steve69 has tried to create an obdurate world of guilt and shame. It can happen here, too. Strange, isn't it, how the worst kinds of arrogant palookas I've ever seen are always the first to open new avenues for the expression of hate? His modes of thought are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? That is, do his fans actually enjoy the distinction of being the most foul astrologers on the planet? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that he has never disproved anything I've ever written. Steve69 does, however, often try to discredit me by means of flagrant misquotations, by attributing to me views that I've never expressed. In the end, no matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how his idolators like having a stamp of assurance from him that what they're doing is fashionable, or at least acceptable. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also keep the faith.
We've tolerated Steve69's obstinate barbs long enough. It's time to lose our patience and chill our kindness. It's time to yank up uncompromising blusterers from the dark rocks under which they hide and flaunt them before the bright sunshine of public exposure. It's time to shout to the world that he sometimes uses the word "parallelogrammatical" when describing his intimations. Beware! This is a buzzword designed for emotional response. Steve69 dreams of a time when he'll be free to dam the flow of effective communication. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen—not may happen but will happen—if we don't interfere, if we don't extricate as many people as possible from his grip.
It is grossly misleading merely to claim that Steve69 should clarify his point so people like you and me can tell what the heck he's talking about. Without clarification, Steve69's memoirs sound lofty and include some emotionally charged words but don't really seem to make any sense. I could make a long argument for the idea that paternalism advances his long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship, as if it made any difference.
One argument Steve69 makes is that he can be trusted to judge the rest of the world from a unique perch of pure wisdom. That's just sheer arrant nonsense. The truth is that he has been trying for quite some time to convince us that I'm too pudibund to shed a little light on some of the ignorant prejudices that reside within his pea-sized brain. I suggest he take this rotting ordure and dump it where he and his fellow malicious talebearers congregate. At least then we could compare, contrast, and identify the connections among different types of disruptive antipluralism without having to worry that he will organize a whispering campaign against me. If we shatter the illusion that the most valuable skill one can have is the ability to lie convincingly then the sea of nonrepresentationalism, on which he so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. Please don't misinterpret that last statement to mean that Steve69 is a martyr for freedom and a victim of barbarism. That's not at all what it means. Rather, it means that I'm at loggerheads with Steve69 on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that he has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature. I take the opposite position, that Steve69 used to be a major proponent of chauvinism. Nowadays, he's putting all of his support behind sectarianism. As they say, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Although the origins, sources, and causes of Steve69's stupid, beastly tracts are complex and interrelated and obviously difficult to identify without careful qualification, there is reason to believe that I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness—not in a dark, flippant world run by truculent, snappish Steve69 clones. The sole point of agreement between myself and delusional proponents of sesquipedalianism (especially the pretentious type) is that if the country were overrun by blockish monomaniacs, we could expect to observe widespread discrimination in our daily lives—stares from sales clerks, taxis that don't stop, and unwarranted license and registration checks by police. Steve69's grand plan is to beat plowshares into swords. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, when Steve69 hears anyone say that you can see where this is going, his answer is to break us up into a set of quarreling, wrangling, squabbling factions. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to act as a positive role model for younger people. You should never allow a day to go by in which you do not bring this fundamental truth to at least one new person. It is no more complicated than that.
We must show Steve69 that we are not powerless pedestrians on the asphalt of life. We must show him that we can acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment. Maybe then Steve69 will realize that I can't follow his pretzel logic. I do, however, know that I am not interested in debating Steve69. One can't have a debate with someone who is so willingly ignorant of the most basic tenets of the subject being discussed.
Steve69 is locked into his present course of destruction. He does not have the interest or the will to change his fundamentally paltry slurs. I normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind Steve69 that we were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to foster mutual understanding. We were not put here to abet a resurgence of passive-aggressive vandalism, as Steve69 might insist. Maybe it's just me, but don't you think that he has lost sight of the lessons of history?
Steve69 has a staggering number of pompous, lubricious bootlickers. One way to lower their numbers, if not eradicate them entirely, is simple. We just inform them that Steve69 is an ill-natured putrid-type. I use that label only when it's true. If you don't believe it is, then consider that Steve69 just reported that anyone who resists him deserves to be crushed. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Steve69's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to marginalize dissident voices.
Tell me something: Will peeling back the onion of Steve69's combative epithets cause Steve69 to shed tears or will it merely enhance his desire to trample into the mud all that is fine and noble and beautiful? All I can do now is give you a bare-bones answer and then let you dig into it yourself. To understand the basic answer you need to realize that I, hardheaded cynic that I am, would like to give you an example of how rude Steve69 can be. Steve69 has admitted that he intends to lower this country's moral tone and depreciate its commercial integrity. Okay, that may have been a particularly bald-faced and unsubtle example but it would be charitable of me not to mention that Steve69 speaks with such certainty and self-confidence that his lackeys are utterly convinced that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity so I will instead maintain that if he hadn't been increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out exposing some of Steve69's flighty deeds. In any case, one can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Steve69, however, is more likely to call for a return to that which wasn't particularly good in the first place. Thus, in summing up, we can establish the following: 1) The underlying reasons and causes for Mr. Steve69's haughty treatises must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease, and 2) Steve69's emotional involvement with antinomianism obscures his ability to see things objectively.
way 2 lazy to read this....
bottom line steve69 > fml