A Formal Complaint about the Administration Team.

Friends, countrymen, people who hate Olden's Administration, lend me your ears; I come to bury Olden's Administration, not to praise it. It isn't important whether you agree with every detail that I intend to present. What matters is that you begin to realize that Olden's Administration keeps saying that we should be grateful for the precious freedom to be robbed and kicked in the face by such a noble creature as it. This is exemplary of the nonsensical rhetoric and scaremongering that typifies the language of vicious proponents of solecism and other craven, headlong palookas. Olden's Administration's platitudes are totally lacking in empirical support. Regular readers of my letters probably take that for granted, but if I am to shoo away Olden's Administration like the annoying bug that it is, I must explain to the population at large that if I didn't sincerely believe that when one succeeds in eking out a kernel of content from Olden's Administration's linguistic games and complex exegeses, it usually turns out to be either banal or blatantly false, then I wouldn't be writing this letter.

Although theoretical differences can be drawn between Olden's Administration's malign blandishments and brainless, intransigent misoneism, these are distinctions without a difference. Olden's Administration doesn't simply want people to believe that its disquisitions prevent smallpox. It wants this belief drummed into people's heads from birth. It wants it to be accepted as an axiom, an assumed part of the nature of reality. Only then will Olden's Administration truly be able to get away with glorifying violent, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. Olden's Administration shouldn't set the hoops through which we all must jump. That would be like asking a question at a news conference and, too angry and passionate to wait for the answer, exiting the auditorium before the response. Both of those actions inflict more death and destruction than Genghis Khan's hordes.

Where does the line get drawn? Olden's Administration claims that its pleas can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality. That claim is preposterous and, to use Olden's Administration's own language, overtly hypocritical. No history can justify it.

Olden's Administration surely needs a healthy dose of conflict-resolution and peer-mediation training. If you doubt this, just ask around. I shall be blamed by ignorant persons when I say that we should act and act fast. Cruel as that maxim may appear, it's the type of organization that will trump up any lie for the occasion, and the more of a thumper it is, the better Olden's Administration likes it. Maybe it's just me, but don't you think that for all of Olden's Administration's professed concern for human rights, it has yet to take a firm and unambiguous stand against those coldhearted hippies who deny citizens the ability to draw their own conclusions about the potential for violence that Olden's Administration may be generating? There is historical precedent for Olden's Administration's animadversions. Specifically, for as far back as I can remember, it has been turning back the clock and repealing all the civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation now on the books. Given how one sniffish activity always leads to another, it should come as no surprise that Olden's Administration's causeries are like an enormous propagandism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must counteract the subtle but pervasive social message that says that might makes right because Olden's Administration has planted its protégés everywhere. You can find them in businesses, unions, activist organizations, tax-exempt foundations, professional societies, movies, schools, churches, and so on. Not only does this subversive approach enhance Olden's Administration's ability to deny minorities a cultural voice, but it also provides irrefutable evidence that given a choice of having it construct gas chambers, incinerators, gulags, and concentration camps or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we lived in a world without lawless New Age ruffians? In the end, the most telling thing is that there are some simple truths in this world. First, Olden's Administration and other self-centered autocrats continue to whine and pule about how their rights are so much more important than anyone else's. Second, some deep void within Olden's Administration makes it necessary for it to cultivate networks of snitches and spies to ensure that any unity against it can immediately be nipped in the bud. And finally, if it is going to talk about you and me in terms that are not fit to be repeated, then it should at least have the self-respect to remind itself of a few things: First, its head is so far in rectal defilade it would require major surgery to extricate it. And second, its operatives all look like it, think like it, act like it, and misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of immature escapism, just like Olden's Administration does. And all this in the name of—let me see if I can get their propaganda straight—brotherhood and service. Ha!

Our national media is controlled by mawkish, insincere astrologers. That's why you probably haven't heard that Olden's Administration believes it's perfectly okay to scar little children's self-image. More than anything else, such beliefs shed light on Olden's Administration's moral values and suggest incontrovertibly that it has conceived the project of reigning over opinions and of conquering neither kingdoms nor provinces but the human mind. If this project succeeds then immoral bludgers will be free to create a beachhead for organized autism. Even worse, it will be illegal for anyone to say anything about how in my observations upon irreligionism, I have expressed no opinion thus far of the mode of its extinguishment or melioration. I will note, however, though I still have nothing to propose, that honor means nothing to Olden's Administration. Principles mean nothing to Olden's Administration. All it cares about is how to see to it that all patriotic endeavors are directed down blind alleys where they end only in frustration and discouragement.

The claim that Olden's Administration's mistakes are always someone else's fault is illusory. That much is crystal clear. But did you know that this is betrayal of the many by the few? That's why I'm telling you that Olden's Administration keeps saying that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. For some reason, Olden's Administration's expositors actually believe this nonsense. Olden's Administration may flout all of society's rules right after it reads this letter. Let it. Before the year is over, I will embrace diversity.

It would be nice to say that scummy obstructionism doesn't exist anymore but we all know that it does. We should take steps against the whole dotty brotherhood of sappy perjurers. (Goodness knows, our elected officials aren't going to.)

If it turns out that there's no way to prevent Olden's Administration from bribing the parasitic with the earnings of the productive then I guess it'll be time to throw my cards on the table and call it quits. I'll just have to give up trying to enable all people to achieve their potential as human beings and accept the fact that in public, it vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, it never fails to make bigotry respectable. Olden's Administration uses the word "antitintinnabularian" without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. Organizations that are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated.

Why is Olden's Administration rewarding mediocrity? It says it's doing it for some worthy cause. In reality, Olden's Administration is doing it because some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, if I chose to do so I could write exclusively about its dirty philosophies and never be lacking for material. Nonetheless, I'd rather spend some time discussing how Olden's Administration's philippics can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that Olden's Administration is extremely selfish. In fact, my Selfish-O-Meter confirms that when Olden's Administration says that it has a fearless dedication to reason and truth, in its mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like it believes it has said something very profound. So you see, Olden's Administration exudes the foul odor of extremism.

I say!

Okay, I read half of this and noticed you are going off into space. Put your dictionary down and chill yoself man.

Reager wrote:

Okay, I read half of this and noticed you are going off into space. Put your dictionary down and chill yoself man.

it's meant to be indecipherable

Good, cause for a minute I was gonna start reading big books to boost my vocabulary.

Reager wrote:

Okay, I read half of this and noticed you are going off into space. Put your dictionary down and chill yoself man.

I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Reager twisting my words in a profligate attempt to drive us into a state of apoplexy. Instead of focusing on why we have indulged his chauvinistic quips for far too long, I would like to remind people that presumptuous, unenlightened drunks are like putty in his hands. Reager effortlessly molds them into loyal disciples who don't think twice about creating a climate in which it will be assumed that our achievements reflect not individual worth, talent, or skill, but special consideration. This much is clear: We are at war. Don't think we're not just because you're not stepping over dead bodies in the streets. We're at war with Reager's feckless, irresponsible excuses. We're at war with his unctuous ethics. And we're at war with his effrontive off-the-cuff comments. As in any war, we ought to be aware of the fact that the primary weapons of Reager's froward collaborators are lies and deception. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is, then there is unequivocally no hope for you.

Maybe some day, Reager will finally stop trying to monopolize the press. Don't hold your breath, though. At no time in the past did the worst types of malign, passive-aggressive scatterbrains I've ever seen shamble through the streets of cities, demanding rights they imagine some supernatural power has bestowed upon them. We must fight for our freedom of speech. Those who claim otherwise do so only to justify their own destructive generalizations. We can no longer afford to do nothing about Reager's despicable squibs. Instead, we must strike while the iron is hot and put the fear of God into him.

I can't follow Reager's pretzel logic. I do, however, know that he focuses on feelings rather than facts. Sure, Reager attempts to twist and distort facts to justify his feelings, but that just goes to show that he has stated that anyone who disagrees with him is a potential terrorist. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Now that's just pathological.

On a more personal note, from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Reager's coadjutors have always found a way to shank the working class in the back to keep the cash spigots flowing. Here's some food for thought: The point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to keep the faith, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, Reager should not level filth and slime at everyone opposed to his manifestos. Not now, not ever. He yields to the mammalian desire to assert individuality by attracting attention. Unfortunately, for Reager, "attracting attention" usually implies "engendering ill will".

One wonders if Reager has the cheek to bring this battle to a fever pitch. I indubitably hope not because I see how important his nasty, indelicate paroxysms are to his compeers and I laugh. I laugh because there are some basic biological realities of the world in which we live. These realities are doubtless regrettable, but they are unalterable. If Reager finds them intolerable and unthinkable, the only thing that I can suggest is that he try to flag down a flying saucer and take passage for some other solar system, possibly one in which the residents are oblivious to the fact that Reager has occasionally been successful at destroying that which is the envy of—and model for—the entire civilized world. Upon such points his natural character always exhibits itself most determinedly as he further strives to irrationalize thinking on every issue. Let me end this letter by telling Reager that I fully intend to take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance. This action is lawful. This action is moral. And this action is right.

this is thread of trolling. run away before everything becomes walls of text.

PuPeT-KaI wrote:

this is thread of trolling. run away before everything becomes walls of text.

I have facts for those who think and arguments for those who reason. Instead of focusing on why such conduct as OrangeApple's induced the despotism of Cromwell and the two Bonapartes, I would like to remind people that I want to expose all of OrangeApple's filthy, subversive, and destructive activities. That may seem simple enough, but OrangeApple has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which censorship could benefit us. Then again, just because OrangeApple is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that he is a spokesman for God.

The absurdity of OrangeApple's initiatives did not dawn on me until I realized that I am declaring open season on uncompanionable scofflaws like OrangeApple who promote separatism's traits as normative values to be embraced. That's just a fancy way of saying that OrangeApple's policies are destructive. They're morally destructive, socially destructive—even intellectually destructive. And, as if that weren't enough, I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by him and his trucklers. As a parenthetical note, OrangeApple doesn't want to acknowledge that he exploits people's nationalistic views and religious fervor to trick them into blowing the whole situation way out of proportion. In fact, OrangeApple would rather block all discussion on the subject. I suppose that's because it's easy to tell if he's lying. If his lips are moving, he's lying.

We must give to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. OrangeApple's diatribes stink to high heaven. Have you noticed that that hasn't been covered at all by the mainstream media? Maybe they're afraid that OrangeApple will retaliate by smearing people of impeccable character and reputation. He promises his sympathizers that as soon as he's finished promoting a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk, they'll all become rich beyond their wildest dreams. There's an obvious analogy here to the way that vultures eat a cadaver and from its rottenness insects and worms suck their food. The point is that OrangeApple has been trying for quite some time to convince us that petulant, disdainful rumormongers are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. I suggest he take this rotting ordure and dump it where he and his fellow phlegmatic provincials congregate. At least then we could bring fresh leadership and even-handed tolerance to the present controversy without having to worry that he will foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us.

In contrast, in OrangeApple's limited horizon he himself is the important object. As a sequence to this self-conceit, he imagines that anyone who resists him deserves to be crushed. We therefore need to explain to him that the really interesting thing about all this is not that I am ashamed to admit that I live on the same planet as he. The interesting thing is that if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem.

False denials, pleas for sympathy, and a base campaign for smearing others with his own crimes constitute OrangeApple's whole method of defense. That's clear. But only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to create and nurture a true spirit of community. But the first step is to acknowledge that he can't, for the life of him, understand why anyone would prefer so much as one minute of solitude to the company of a randy gang of abysmal yokels. In this case, one cannot help but recall that OrangeApple just reported that if he kicks us in the teeth we'll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on OrangeApple's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to rule with an iron fist.

Unlike OrangeApple, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if—and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty"—he were not actually responsible for trying to use communism as a more destructive form of colonialism, then I'd stop saying that we should not concern ourselves with OrangeApple's putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that it's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of evil prima donnas like OrangeApple can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, OrangeApple wants to make incorrect leaps of logic. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom then you should be working with me to beat him at his own game. Imagine, as it is not hard to do, that I am terrified by the reckless abandon with which he deceives people into thinking that two wrongs make a right. It then follows that if there's one thing that OrangeApple is good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition. Although OrangeApple has repeatedly denied charges of attempting to draw unsuspecting prophets of fascism into the orbit of infantile, nugatory nudniks, I truly avouch that we need to do more to unmask his true face and intentions in regard to paternalism. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us.

Our national media is controlled by the most inane dummkopfs you'll ever see. That's why you probably haven't heard that OrangeApple is a standard-bearer for the unbearable. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that I could hazard a guess and say that his favorite immoral pip-squeaks will plague our minds quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "anatomicochirurgical"?

What OrangeApple fails to mention in his rantings is actually quite telling. For example, did you know that OrangeApple wants to create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats? Or that snippy libertinism is not new? If he had his way, schools would teach students that OrangeApple's theatrics enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. This is not education but indoctrination. It prevents students from learning about how OrangeApple is planning to dispense outright misinformation and flashlight-under-the-chin ghost stories. This does not bode well for the future because if you think you can escape from his hopeless proposed social programs, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that I maintain that there are in fact many people who possess the intelligence, wisdom, talent, and ability to expose injustice and puncture prejudice. My goal is to locate those people and encourage them to help me provide some balance to OrangeApple's one-sided perversions.

Just look at the bill of fare served up in recent movies and television programs and you will hardly be able to deny that unconscionable and soulless, OrangeApple's publications resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that I warrant that OrangeApple's cultists cheat on taxes simply because they think it's fun. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that I recently heard a famous celebrity—I forgot which one—say, "'OrangeApple' has become a byword for treachery and deceit." That's such a great quote, I wish I had been the one who thought of it. Sadly, the cleverest thing I ever said was that OrangeApple's primary goal is to foment, precipitate, and finance large-scale wars to emasculate and bankrupt nations and thereby force them into a one-world government. All of his other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that I do not find ideas that are misinformed, directionless, and stolid to be "funny". Maybe I lack a sense of humor, but maybe OrangeApple has stated that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that Man's eternal search for Truth is a challenge to be avoided at all costs. Now that's just coprophagous. A final note: OrangeApple stands for rogue authority, social directives, and onerous laws that weaken personal freedoms.

Zaku wrote:

PuPeT-KaI wrote:

this is thread of trolling. run away before everything becomes walls of text.

I have facts for those who think and arguments for those who reason. Instead of focusing on why such conduct as OrangeApple's induced the despotism of Cromwell and the two Bonapartes, I would like to remind people that I want to expose all of OrangeApple's filthy, subversive, and destructive activities. That may seem simple enough, but OrangeApple has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which censorship could benefit us. Then again, just because OrangeApple is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that he is a spokesman for God.

you called me a he
a
he

tl;dr

Complaint generators are fun.

How long did It take you to write this?

Christoph wrote:

How long did It take you to write this?

Complaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generatorsComplaint generators


http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

i miss mack

zaku, how do i trade you for mack

Mack, I think I annoyed him into deleting me off his friends list about six times

thats not a surprise, gambit. you can be pretty annoying when you want to be.

Kain wrote:

i miss mack

zaku, how do i trade you for mack

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-

I am not alpha enough to be traded for Mack.

admin team is comprised of furries
gentlemen i think this thread is over. take your katanas and tophats at the door. Fish fingers will be supplied upon exit.

Gambit wrote:

Mack, I think I annoyed him into deleting me off his friends list about six times

Welcome to the club. There's quite a few of us now.

I pride myself on my exactitude. As you'll see from this letter, I provide copious detail and try to be as precise as possible when describing the ways in which scrutinizing Mr. Kruggly's pleas may be instructive in this regard. Read on, gentle reader, and hear what I have to say. I'm at loggerheads with Kruggly on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that his rantings are intelligent, commonsensical, and entirely consonant with the views of ordinary people. I take the opposite position, that Kruggly 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.

I like to speak of Kruggly as "filthy". That's a reasonable term to use, I suspect, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, if I were a complete sap, I'd believe his line that he's a moral exemplar. Unfortunately for him, I realize that Kruggly counts pugnacious serpents as his friends. Unfortunately for him, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that Kruggly likes to put the public peace perpetually in danger. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Kruggly and his subordinates 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 lead Kruggly out of a dream world and back to hard reality.

How is it that I knew from the beginning that Kruggly would have more impact on Earth's biological, geological, and chemical systems during our lifetime and our children's than all preceding human generations had together? Am I smarter than everyone else? No, not at all. I'll admit that I'm smarter than Kruggly but that's like saying that I'm smarter than a toad. I knew what Kruggly would do because I realized that if we don't do something soon, his sententious, asinine anecdotes will rise like a golem with a million hands on a million throats to choke the honor out of decent, hardworking people. Did you know that some foolhardy layabouts want to help him interfere with a person's work performance, bodily security, physical movement, and privacy rights? Others just want to ride the demagogism bandwagon. In either case, I find it necessary, if I am to meet my reader on something like a common ground of understanding, to point out that Kruggly has repeatedly indicated a desire to rewrite history to reflect or magnify an imaginary "victimhood". Is that the sound of rarefied respectability that Kruggly's functionaries so frequently attribute to Kruggly? The patronizing blathering of a vainglorious clueless-type is more like it. In fact, many people who follow Kruggly's casus belli have come to the erroneous conclusion that Kruggly is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. The stark truth of the matter is that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence.

Despite total incompetence, Kruggly is often afflicted with an amazing conceit that causes him to separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities. The very genesis of his fatuous ramblings is in pessimism. And it seems to me to be a neat bit of historic justice that Kruggly will eventually himself be destroyed by pessimism. Even though commercialism is an inherently oppressive ideology, this does not negate the fact that he and I are as different as chalk and cheese. Kruggly, for instance, wants to nourish adversarial ideologies. I, on the other hand, want to give Kruggly condign punishment. That's why I need to tell you that he is doing everything in his power to make me turn to a life of crime. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance.

Despite Kruggly's evident lack of grounding in what he's talking about, if we don't extirpate interventionism root, trunk, and branch then Kruggly will undermine the basic values of work, responsibility, and family. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that some people believe that one day Kruggly's coadjutors will tell Kruggly how wrong he is. Such people are doomed to disappointment, especially when one considers that Kruggly says it is within his legal right to reduce meaningful political discussions to "my team versus your team" identity-based politics. Whether or not he indeed has such a right, Kruggly's statements such as "Dodgy, muzzy-headed spielers are easily housebroken" indicate that we're not all looking at the same set of facts. Fortunately, these facts are easily verifiable with a trip to the library by any open and honest individual.

Kruggly thinks that immoralism brings one closer to nirvana. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Now let's go back to what I was saying earlier about how it is both frustrating and frightening to observe the extreme ignorance—no, idiocy—present in his publicity stunts. As I previously stated, Kruggly believes that it is everyone's obligation to make excessive use of foul language. That view is anathema to the cause of liberty. If it is not loudly refuted our future will be dire indeed. He is out to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about his obiter dicta. And when we play his game, we become accomplices.

Kruggly's most addlepated tactic is to fabricate a phony war between antihumanist, disdainful clodpolls and insane traitors. This way, he can subjugate both groups into helping him convince others that piteous dunderheads are the "chosen people" of scriptural prophecy. I sincerely don't want that to happen, which is why I'm telling you that anyone who has spent much time wading through the pious, obscurantist, jargon-filled cant that now passes for "advanced" thought in the humanities already knows that sanguinary ideas are continually escaping the confines of Kruggly's (obviously very weak) mind. What may be news, however, is that he unequivocally believes that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? If I'm not horribly mistaken, there's a painfully simple answer. It regards the way that his patsies' thinking is fenced in by many constraints. Their minds are not free because they dare not be. Oddly enough, Kruggly's purpose is not to enlighten but to deceive. Stranger still, Kruggly repeats the term "microcinematographic" over and over again in everything he writes. Is this repetition part of some new drinking game, or is Kruggly merely trying to confuse us into believing that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to jump on everything that is written, said, or even implied and label it as either amateurish or tactless? To answer that question, note that history provides a number of instructive examples for us to study. For instance, it has long been the case that Kruggly and his helots are a bunch of skinheads. As you know, skinheads are parvenus; parvenus are menaces; menaces are nitwits; and nitwits all want to fuel the fires of hatred. The point is that Kruggly's disquisitions are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to subject human beings to indignities.

Daily, the truth is being impressed upon us that I can't make heads or tails of Kruggly's philosophies. I mean, does he want to preach hatred, or doesn't he? I appreciate feedback and other people's views on subjects. I don't, however, appreciate feedback when it's given in an unprofessional manner. One can usually be pretty sure when Kruggly is lying. Sometimes there's a little doubt: maybe it's not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Kruggly claims that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable, there's no room for ambiguity: he's clearly lying.

Just don't expect consistency from a man who is completely and surely wild. I don't know if I speak for anybody but myself on this, but as the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Kruggly's love of hedonism and oligarchism gives a new, perverse dimension to the old adage, De gustibus non est disputandum. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, Kruggly has been trying to popularize the narrative that he is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamy notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him foment a radical realignment of industrialized economies. In a tacit concession of defeat, he is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to accomplish coercively what his self-serving denunciations have failed at. Kruggly has been known to consign our traditional values to the rubbish heap of nonrepresentationalism. That always spurs on his slaves to introduce changes without testing them first. That, in turn, encourages Kruggly to convince people that their peers are already riding the Kruggly bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. This cycle inevitably, inexorably ratchets upwards and outwards until at last some jejune thug winds up taking control of a nation and sucking it dry.

I would rail on at length about Kruggly's impertinent, footling newsgroup postings but will leave that for another time. Suffice it to say that Kruggly should stop calling me a gormless, unforgiving blusterer. Although I've been called worse things by better people, I admit that I'm not perfect. I admit that I may have been a bit obtuse when I stated that Kruggly's warnings are mired in self-centered militarism. Still, that doesn't justify the name-calling, rudeness, and simple ugliness that Kruggly invariably finds so necessary. Nor does it justify his forcing square pegs into round holes. The bottom line is that besides being blatantly sexist towards the female gender, Mr. Kruggly is thoroughly evil.

Quote :

Mr. Kruggly is thoroughly evil.

:'(

but i am no sexist sir