Wanted
2008-11-05 20:29:21
In this letter, I plan to discuss Sen. Barrack Obama's tyrannical programs of Gleichschaltung quite extensively. Note that the details aren't pleasant. In fact, they're shocking. But I avouch that people who don't know what Sen. Obama is up to really need to be shocked. The following paragraphs are intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current situation is.
Put simply, Sen. Obama's secret passion is to move selfish tribalism from the cold-blooded fringe into a realm of respectability. For shame! I want to tackle the multinational death machine that Sen. Obama is currently constructing. But first, let me pose an abstract question. What demons possessed Sen. Obama to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of violence, decay, and moral disregard? Well, we all know the answer to that question, don't we? But in case you don't, then you should note that he should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. The primary point of disagreement between myself and Sen. Obama is whether or not I have a plan to shed a little light on some of the ignorant prejudices that reside within his pea-sized brain. I call this plan "Operation lead us all toward a better, brighter future". (Granted, I need a shorter, catchier name but that one will do for now.) My plan's underlying motif is that Sen. Obama's behavior might be different if he were told that clueless cretins like him are all alike. Of course, as far as Sen. Obama's concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, "My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts." That's why I'm telling you that even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that his tricks have caused widespread social alienation and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung.
In point of fact, it's Sen. Obama's deep-seated belief that the cure for evil is more evil. Sure, he might be able to justify conclusions like that – using biased or one-sided information, of course – but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that Sen. Obama's cajoleries epitomize ageism in its truest form. 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: When Sen. Obama's loquacious utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, he appears to be saying that irritable skinheads and gormless wankers should rule this country. For me, this short-sighted moonshine serves only to emphasize how I can't, for the life of me, see why Sen. Obama wants to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of scornful factionalism. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to reverse the devolutionary course that he has set for us. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that I defy the discourteous urban guerrillas who crush any semblance of opposition to his pharisaical fairy tales and I defy the powers of darkness that they represent.
Does Sen. Obama really know anything about the hariolations he claims to support? No, he doesn't. As someone who is working hard to address the continued social injustice shown by dishonest renegades, I must point out that he says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions – even our library records. Why on Earth does he need to monitor our library records? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that there is something patently passive-aggressive in the notion that we should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy. That's just a fancy way of saying that if you were to ask Sen. Obama, he'd say that he doesn't remember challenging all I stand for. Not only does Sen. Obama indeed have a very selective memory, but there's a chance that he will manipulate public understanding of demagogism quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "hydrometallurgically". Well, that's extremely speculative but it is clear today that Sen. Obama and I are as different as chalk and cheese. He, for instance, wants to prey on people's fear of political and economic instability. I, on the other hand, want to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies. That's why I need to tell you that his intent is to prevent us from asking questions. Sen. Obama doesn't want the details checked. He doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts he presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of his "facts" are false.
Take it from me: I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how in a recent essay, Sen. Obama stated that what I call unconscionable pettifoggers are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. 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 if I may be so bold, I know some huffy, capricious slackers who actually believe that his outbursts are not worth getting outraged about. Incredible? Those same people have told me that Sen. Obama's revenge fantasies are Holy Writ. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that he expects people to bow and scrape before him. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us.
Obviously, you shouldn't automatically believe all the allegations I've been making, so let me elaborate a bit. Sen. Obama claims that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of snobbism. Well, I beg to differ. When I look back I think, "Inequality does not beget equality." Many of the people I've talked to have said that Sen. Obama and his vassals should all be put up against a wall and given traitors' justice. Without commenting on that specifically I'd merely like to point out that Sen. Obama insists that ethical responsibility is merely a trammel of earthbound mortals and should not be required of a demigod like him. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, Sen. Obama plans to defend particularism, neocolonialism, and notions of racial superiority. The result will be an amalgam of prurient conformism and splenetic fogyism, if such a monster can be imagined.
Unfortunately, there is no shortage of individuals and organizations, many of whom may seem innocent at first glance, who secretly want to leave a generation of people planted in the mud of a nit-picky world to begin a new life in the shadows of sectarianism. I have the following advice for Sen. Obama: If you can't manage to be grateful for all the things we've done for you, at least have a little dignity, don't whine, and don't expect to be treated like a fragile doll just because you have a theatrically hypersensitive soul and delusions of entitlement. Given his current mind-set, his confreres resist seeing that the destructive power of his whinges is their appeal to the stubborn, the snippy, the maladroit, and the uncompanionable. They resist seeing such things because to see them, to examine them, to think about them and draw conclusions from them is to lift the fog from Sen. Obama's thinking.
Sen. Obama's understrappers are not technically immoral devious-types but rather reprehensible lunkheads. I assert that there is a small – yet not entirely insignificant – difference. Before I continue, let me state that Sen. Obama's holier-than-thou attitudes have merged with poststructuralism in several interesting ways. Both spring from the same kind of reality-denying mentality. Both silence any criticism of the brainwashing and double standards that Sen. Obama has increasingly been practicing. And both blow the whole situation way out of proportion. He wants nothing less than to fleece people out of their life's savings. His apparatchiks then wonder, "What's wrong with that?" Well, there's not much to be done with disdainful jabberers who can't figure out what's wrong with that, but the rest of us can plainly see that we must invite all the people who have been harmed by Sen. Obama to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that if Sen. Obama can one day strip people of their rights to free expression and individuality then the long descent into night is sure to follow.
Is Sen. Obama a pious person? Yes, although his "piety" unerringly leads him to whichever dogma is best for business. Speaking of which, Sen. Obama wants to prohibit any discussion of her attempts to bamboozle people into believing that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. While it is clear why he wants that to be a taboo subject, Sen. Obama's "depressurize the frail vessel of human hopes" mentality is so pervasive that I feel like I'm going to become clinically depressed. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: How improvident can he be? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. I will not quibble with him as to whether or not he leaves me no choice but to become the target of prejudice, ridicule, discrimination, and physical violence. Instead, I'll simply state that a common thread runs through most of Sen. Obama's philosophies, a thread so headlong that it disgusts me nearly to the point of physical illness and leave it at that.
What Sen. Obama fails to mention in his squibs is actually quite telling. For example, did you know that Sen. Obama wants to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness? Or that priggism is sustained by rigid ideological categories? Astute observers have known for years that he just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to inculcate mudslinging subliminal psywar campaigns." He claims to have read somewhere that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. I don't doubt that he has indeed read such a thing; one can find all sorts of crazy stuff on the Internet. More reliable sources, however, tend to agree that Sen. Obama's precepts reek of racialism. I use the word "reek" because if Sen. Obama believes that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong, then it's obvious why he thinks that the few of us who complain regularly about his smears are simply spoiling the party. So you see, deranged pissants who transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore will, hopefully, eventually be replaced by people who believe in freedom, justice, and the pursuit of personal growth.
Put simply, Sen. Obama's secret passion is to move selfish tribalism from the cold-blooded fringe into a realm of respectability. For shame! I want to tackle the multinational death machine that Sen. Obama is currently constructing. But first, let me pose an abstract question. What demons possessed Sen. Obama to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of violence, decay, and moral disregard? Well, we all know the answer to that question, don't we? But in case you don't, then you should note that he should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. The primary point of disagreement between myself and Sen. Obama is whether or not I have a plan to shed a little light on some of the ignorant prejudices that reside within his pea-sized brain. I call this plan "Operation lead us all toward a better, brighter future". (Granted, I need a shorter, catchier name but that one will do for now.) My plan's underlying motif is that Sen. Obama's behavior might be different if he were told that clueless cretins like him are all alike. Of course, as far as Sen. Obama's concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, "My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts." That's why I'm telling you that even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that his tricks have caused widespread social alienation and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung.
In point of fact, it's Sen. Obama's deep-seated belief that the cure for evil is more evil. Sure, he might be able to justify conclusions like that – using biased or one-sided information, of course – but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that Sen. Obama's cajoleries epitomize ageism in its truest form. 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: When Sen. Obama's loquacious utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, he appears to be saying that irritable skinheads and gormless wankers should rule this country. For me, this short-sighted moonshine serves only to emphasize how I can't, for the life of me, see why Sen. Obama wants to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of scornful factionalism. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to reverse the devolutionary course that he has set for us. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that I defy the discourteous urban guerrillas who crush any semblance of opposition to his pharisaical fairy tales and I defy the powers of darkness that they represent.
Does Sen. Obama really know anything about the hariolations he claims to support? No, he doesn't. As someone who is working hard to address the continued social injustice shown by dishonest renegades, I must point out that he says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions – even our library records. Why on Earth does he need to monitor our library records? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that there is something patently passive-aggressive in the notion that we should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy. That's just a fancy way of saying that if you were to ask Sen. Obama, he'd say that he doesn't remember challenging all I stand for. Not only does Sen. Obama indeed have a very selective memory, but there's a chance that he will manipulate public understanding of demagogism quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "hydrometallurgically". Well, that's extremely speculative but it is clear today that Sen. Obama and I are as different as chalk and cheese. He, for instance, wants to prey on people's fear of political and economic instability. I, on the other hand, want to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies. That's why I need to tell you that his intent is to prevent us from asking questions. Sen. Obama doesn't want the details checked. He doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts he presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of his "facts" are false.
Take it from me: I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how in a recent essay, Sen. Obama stated that what I call unconscionable pettifoggers are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. 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 if I may be so bold, I know some huffy, capricious slackers who actually believe that his outbursts are not worth getting outraged about. Incredible? Those same people have told me that Sen. Obama's revenge fantasies are Holy Writ. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that he expects people to bow and scrape before him. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us.
Obviously, you shouldn't automatically believe all the allegations I've been making, so let me elaborate a bit. Sen. Obama claims that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of snobbism. Well, I beg to differ. When I look back I think, "Inequality does not beget equality." Many of the people I've talked to have said that Sen. Obama and his vassals should all be put up against a wall and given traitors' justice. Without commenting on that specifically I'd merely like to point out that Sen. Obama insists that ethical responsibility is merely a trammel of earthbound mortals and should not be required of a demigod like him. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, Sen. Obama plans to defend particularism, neocolonialism, and notions of racial superiority. The result will be an amalgam of prurient conformism and splenetic fogyism, if such a monster can be imagined.
Unfortunately, there is no shortage of individuals and organizations, many of whom may seem innocent at first glance, who secretly want to leave a generation of people planted in the mud of a nit-picky world to begin a new life in the shadows of sectarianism. I have the following advice for Sen. Obama: If you can't manage to be grateful for all the things we've done for you, at least have a little dignity, don't whine, and don't expect to be treated like a fragile doll just because you have a theatrically hypersensitive soul and delusions of entitlement. Given his current mind-set, his confreres resist seeing that the destructive power of his whinges is their appeal to the stubborn, the snippy, the maladroit, and the uncompanionable. They resist seeing such things because to see them, to examine them, to think about them and draw conclusions from them is to lift the fog from Sen. Obama's thinking.
Sen. Obama's understrappers are not technically immoral devious-types but rather reprehensible lunkheads. I assert that there is a small – yet not entirely insignificant – difference. Before I continue, let me state that Sen. Obama's holier-than-thou attitudes have merged with poststructuralism in several interesting ways. Both spring from the same kind of reality-denying mentality. Both silence any criticism of the brainwashing and double standards that Sen. Obama has increasingly been practicing. And both blow the whole situation way out of proportion. He wants nothing less than to fleece people out of their life's savings. His apparatchiks then wonder, "What's wrong with that?" Well, there's not much to be done with disdainful jabberers who can't figure out what's wrong with that, but the rest of us can plainly see that we must invite all the people who have been harmed by Sen. Obama to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that if Sen. Obama can one day strip people of their rights to free expression and individuality then the long descent into night is sure to follow.
Is Sen. Obama a pious person? Yes, although his "piety" unerringly leads him to whichever dogma is best for business. Speaking of which, Sen. Obama wants to prohibit any discussion of her attempts to bamboozle people into believing that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. While it is clear why he wants that to be a taboo subject, Sen. Obama's "depressurize the frail vessel of human hopes" mentality is so pervasive that I feel like I'm going to become clinically depressed. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: How improvident can he be? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. I will not quibble with him as to whether or not he leaves me no choice but to become the target of prejudice, ridicule, discrimination, and physical violence. Instead, I'll simply state that a common thread runs through most of Sen. Obama's philosophies, a thread so headlong that it disgusts me nearly to the point of physical illness and leave it at that.
What Sen. Obama fails to mention in his squibs is actually quite telling. For example, did you know that Sen. Obama wants to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness? Or that priggism is sustained by rigid ideological categories? Astute observers have known for years that he just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to inculcate mudslinging subliminal psywar campaigns." He claims to have read somewhere that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. I don't doubt that he has indeed read such a thing; one can find all sorts of crazy stuff on the Internet. More reliable sources, however, tend to agree that Sen. Obama's precepts reek of racialism. I use the word "reek" because if Sen. Obama believes that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong, then it's obvious why he thinks that the few of us who complain regularly about his smears are simply spoiling the party. So you see, deranged pissants who transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore will, hopefully, eventually be replaced by people who believe in freedom, justice, and the pursuit of personal growth.
^^ Made by me