Complaint Letter Generator

[clintl]

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

My complaint about The FOFC

This is a letter I have planned on writing for some time, a letter that I assert is extremely important and one that unquestionably must be heeded if we are to undo the damage caused by The FOFC. As this letter will make clear, at the heart of the problem is The FOFC's obliviousness to history, its moral cowardice masked in bold rhetoric, and its overwhelmingly shallow political posturing. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, the poisonous wine of immoralism had been distilled long before The FOFC entered the scene. The FOFC is merely the agent decanting the poisonous fluid from its bottle into the jug that is world humanity. Now there will, no doubt, be sinful mountebanks out there who will ask, "So what if The FOFC's bootlickers conceal information and, occasionally, blatantly lie? That won't affect me." Such crippled thinking is the best example there is as to why you may have noticed that the moral devastations that accompany The FOFC's jackbooted remarks suffice to slowly but surely develop a Pavlovian reflex in us, to make us afraid to reveal the nature and activity of The FOFC's intimates and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, every time The FOFC tries, it gets increasingly successful in its attempts to threaten the common good. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well.

While it is not my purpose to incriminate or exculpate or vindicate or castigate, it is easy to see faults in others. But it takes perseverance to draw a picture of what we conceive of under the word "pathologicopsychological". I am on an important mission to show The FOFC how it is as wrong as wrong can be. If I don't accomplish that mission, The FOFC's plans to tear down all theoretical frameworks for addressing the issue could well succeed. In the past, when I complained that The FOFC was attempting to impose a one-size-fits-all model on how society should function, I was told that I was just being batty. But nowadays, people realize that it managed to convince a bunch of acrimonious, ugly charlatans to help it turn a deaf ear to need and suffering. What was the quid pro quo there? I mean, the best thing about it is the way that it encourages us to exemplify the principles of honor, duty, loyalty, and courage. No, wait; The FOFC doesn't encourage that. On the contrary, it discourages us from admitting that if the past is any indication of the future, it will once again attempt to pour a few drops of wormwood into our general enthusiasm.

As long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, The FOFC's representatives don't really care that if it is going to mold the mind of virtually every citizen -- young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated -- then it should at least have the self-respect to remind itself of a few things: First, it enjoys the sense of control that comes from forcing someone else to do things the way it wants them done. And second, it knows how to lie. It's too bad it doesn't yet understand the ramifications of lying. It is becoming increasingly obvious to many people that you may be wondering why unrestrained thugs latch onto The FOFC's causeries. It's because people of that nature need to have rhetoric and dogma to recite during times of stress in order to cope. That's also why The FOFC would have us believe that the purpose of life is self-gratification. Yeah, right. I heard through the grapevine that by following The FOFC's suggestions, we have become such poor caretakers of the tree of liberty that it has wilted and is sagging dangerously close to the ground. Whether or not this rumor is true, if its thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, The FOFC wouldn't consider it such a good idea to contravene decency. That's it for this letter. I hope that typing it was not a complete waste of energy. Unfortunately, I do realize that my words will probably trigger no useful response in the flabby synapses of The FOFC's brain. I just felt obligated to go through the motions because the most perceptive members of our society respond positively to my message that The FOFC's ventures are unhealthy and lacking in purpose.

[Kozure]

Holy crap this is hilarious. We were just talking about (here at work) how much our company screws us over, and now we can easily create a letter of complaint with little or no effort. Thank you Scott Pakin. Thank you.

[Wasabiak]

My complaint about Pres. George W Bush

Multifarious avenues of approach vie for attention as potential retorts to Pres. George W Bush's power-hungry imprecations. Let's get down to brass tacks: I suspect that Bush should take more responsibility for his actions. That's just a fancy way of saying that as soon Bush takes us beyond the point of no return, the next thing we'll hear him say is, "Oops, made a mistake". I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, you'll understand why Bush's equivocations were designed from day one to require religious services around the world to begin with "Bush is great; Bush is good; we thank Bush for our daily food". Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Bush's ruses are popular among the worst sorts of delusional tossers there are, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to accept them. If Bush can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If Bush can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for his brazen claims, I think we can safely say that some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of Bush's camp quite adamantly maintain that Bush's way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could think such a thing, but then again, Bush is like a giant octopus sprawling its slimy length over city, state, and nation. Like the octopus of real life, he operates under cover of self-created screen. Bush seizes in his long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection.

Bush's patsies are often caught trying to make people suspicious of those who speak the truth. Of course, they deny this, but we all know full well that it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Bush distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions. The longer we delay action, the harder it will be to open students' eyes, minds, hearts, and souls to the world around them. It follows from this that Bush's musings were never about tolerance and equality. That was just window dressing for the "innocents". Rather, if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds which contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their yellow-bellied mottos. Here's the heart of the matter: Bush twists every argument into some sort of "struggle" between two parties. Bush unvaryingly constitutes the underdog party, which is what he claims gives him the right to destroy the heart and fabric of our nation.

It has been said that Bush exudes the foul odor of exhibitionism. I, in turn, contend that Bush will do everything in his power to pull the levers of Trotskyism and oil the gears of unilateralism. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Bush's featherbrained screeds have been found incompatible with personal security and the rights of property. Bush may mean well but it is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did his reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, we must ask, "Do abhorrent perjurers like his slaves actually have lives, or do they exist solely to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness?" No, don't guess; this isn't audience participation day. I'll just tell you. But before I do, you should note that he says that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. Since I don't know Bush that well, I'll have to be a bit presumptuous when I say that somebody has to deal summarily with prissy, cankered radicals. That somebody can be you. In any case, I want to see all of us working together to act against injustice, whether it concerns drunk driving, domestic violence, or even resistentialism. Yes, this is an idealistic approach to actualizing our restorative goals. Nevertheless, you should realize that even if one is opposed to mingy extremism (and I am), then surely, Bush wants me to stop trying to kick butt and take names. Instead, he'd rather I fall into the trap of thinking that it's okay if his newsgroup postings initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. If Bush truly wanted to be helpful, he wouldn't infringe upon our most important constitutional rights. How dare he criticize my values when his are so obviously negligent? He is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. In the blink of an eye, however, Bush is likely to switch to some sort of "lead people towards iniquity and sin" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. It's shocking just how snippy Pres. George W Bush can be. That's all I have to say. Thank you for reading this letter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[sovereignstar]

The man has recently made a number of people very, very angry, including me. However, as anger serves no function in a successful rebuttal, I will simply state objectively that the man's "compromises" are not modeled on democracy as envisaged by philosophers of the Enlightenment, but on the anti-democratic principles of nativism. The nitty-gritty of what I'm about to write is this: The man's factotums aver that it is the man's moral imperative to use our weaknesses to its advantage. This is precisely the non-equation that the man is trying to patch together. What it's missing, as usual, is that given a choice of having it spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, otiose behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. Be careful not to be charmed by the man's manuscripts. All they do is heat the cauldron of terror until it boils over into our daily lives. Before you read this letter, you might have thought that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Now you know that the man expresses a disdainful nostalgia for a uniform, unchallenging, homogeneous society that never really existed.

[Neon_Chaos]

this is beautiful.

[RebelMan]

My complaint about Tom Delay:

I need to get something out of the way before I begin. I must say that we must go placidly amid the noise and haste if we are to put to rest resentful and delirious ethics such as Rep. Tom Delay's. I want to share this with you because Rep. Delay's attempts to waste hours and hours in fruitless conferences and meetings will earn him automatic membership in Satan's inner circle. That's just a fancy way of saying that Rep. Delay exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up his obvious inferiority. Leaving aside the behavior of other unholy snollygosters, Rep. Delay used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that you should not ask, "Why can't Rep. Delay relieve his aching sense of inadequacy without having to place our children at imminent risk of serious harm?", but rather, "Why does he think that anyone who disagrees with him is ultimately fatuous?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because when he hears anyone say that his intimations are the epitome of insensitivity, his answer is to destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to warn the public against those devious menaces whose positive accomplishments are always practically nil, but whose conceit can scarcely be excelled. We can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we undeniably have to spread the word about Rep. Delay's wishy-washy indiscretions to our friends, our neighbors, our relatives, our co-workers -- even to strangers.

One thing is certain: When Rep. Delay says that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles, in his mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like he believes he has said something very profound. He talks loudly about family values and personal responsibility, but when it comes to backing up those words with actions, all Rep. Delay does is dump effluent into creeks, lakes, streams, and rivers. Finally, any one of the points I made in this letter could be turned into a complete research paper, but the conclusion of each would be the same: Rep. Tom Delay is a tremendous deadweight on our will and morale.

[JPhillips]

My complaint about Skydog:

I feel compelled to preface my remarks with the following: Lord Skydog maintains control over his dupes using intense peer pressure, manipulation of their guilt feelings, attacks on their sexuality, and fear. Some background is in order: Lord Skydog's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his core principle has remained the same: to destroy our culture, our institutions, and our way of life. If you don't believe me, then note that one of Lord Skydog's shock troops keeps throwing "scientific" studies at me, claiming they prove that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. The studies are full of "if"s, "possible"s, "maybe"s, and various exceptions and admissions of their limitations. This leaves the studies inconclusive at best and works of fiction at worst. The only thing these studies can possibly prove is that if I am correctly informed, much can be learned about Lord Skydog by understanding irritating fascism. In any case, to say that it is wild to question his mottos is stinking nonsense and untrue to boot. Plainly stated, Lord Skydog's nostrums are like a Hydra. They continually acquire new heads and new strength. The only way to stunt their growth is to acknowledge that to call him a beast is to defame all quadrupeds. The only way to destroy his Hydra entirely is to provide more people with the knowledge that Lord Skydog can't possibly believe that he is cunctipotent. He's sanctimonious, but he's not that sanctimonious. He thinks that he holds a universal license that allows him to conspire with evil. However, bettering the world is apparently the last item on his "to do" list. Lord Skydog's maudlin preoccupation with quislingism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "interchangeableness", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to pour a few drops of wormwood into our general enthusiasm. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that some unprofessional hippies are actually considering helping Lord Skydog incite young people to copulate early, often, and indiscriminately. How quickly such people forget that they were lied to, made fun of, and ridiculed by Lord Skydog on numerous occasions. His crusades are not witty satire, as Lord Skydog would have you believe. They're simply the benighted ramblings of someone who has no idea or appreciation of what he's mocking.

Why does Lord Skydog want to irrationalize thinking on every issue? Because what he seems to be forgetting is that I, hardheaded cynic that I am, hold his probity in question. That's not the only reason, of course, but I'll get to the other reasons later. To wrap up, I'll just hit the key elements of this letter one last time. First, I am disgusted by Lord Skydog's overweening displays of moral leprosy. Second, my number one priority is to stop his encroachments on our heritage. And finally, he really needs to lighten up.

[sterlingice]

My complaint about Lt. Col. Fluffy Bunny Pants, Jr.

Because of Lt. Col. Fluffy Bunny Pants, Jr.'s attitude, I usually don't respond to her convictions, but this time I'll make an exception. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and replace today's chaos and lack of vision with order and a supreme sense of purpose. Lt. Col. Pants wants to engage in or goad others into engaging in illegal acts. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is Lt. Col. Pants's gossamer grasp of reality.

To be blunt, inasmuch as I disagree with Lt. Col. Pants's accusations and find her ad hominem attacks offensive, I am happy to meet Lt. Col. Pants's speech with more speech and, if necessary, continue this discussion until the truth shines. Believe it or not, in the genesis of Lt. Col. Pants's ideologies, cacodemonic begat vindictive, which begat pigheaded, which begat pudibund. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that perhaps one day we will live in a world where good people are not troubled by fear of temperamental voluptuaries. Until that day arrives, however, we must spread the word that this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to put our liberties at risk by a cruel and stultiloquent rush to consign most of us to the role of Lt. Col. Pants's servants or slaves. Not yet, at least. But Lt. Col. Pants's myopic, adversarial stances leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children her enemies? That is, why can't she value a diversity of approaches without needing to rank them as better and worse? To turn that question around, how obtuse can she be? That's the question that perplexes me the most, because we must reach out to people with the message that the choice we face as a nation is whether to run our country ourselves or let meddlesome social outcasts run it for us. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to put inexorable pressure on Lt. Col. Pants to be a bit more careful about what she says and does. Naturally, from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Lt. Col. Pants's spin doctors have always found a way to engage in the trafficking of human beings.

Here's some news for you: The last time Lt. Col. Pants reached into her bag of dirty tricks, she pulled out a scheme to force her moral code on the rest of us. Interesting, isn't it? What you may find even more interesting is that there is a problem here. A large, biggety, stroppy problem. She loves totalitarianism more than life itself. Enough said. Let's be honest here: Brutal and wild-to-the-core, her ruses resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that Lt. Col. Pants wants us to believe that antinomianism can quell the hatred and disorder in our society. How stupid does she think we are? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that she, already oppressive with her stingy, noisome expositions, will perhaps be the ultimate exterminator of our human species -- if separate species we be -- for her reserve of unguessed horrors could never be borne by mortal brains if loosed upon the world. If you think that that's a frightening thought, then consider that mass anxiety is the equivalent of steroids for Lt. Col. Pants. If we feel helpless, Lt. Col. Pants is energized and ramps up her efforts to lead me down a path of pain and suffering.

One of the goals of heathenism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". Lt. Col. Pants admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Lt. Col. Pants's own mediocrity can flourish. In her reports, sensationalism is witting and unremitting, homophobic and uncouth. She revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to drag everything that is truly great into the gutter. It doesn't do us much good to become angry and wave our arms and shout about the evils of Lt. Col. Pants's goals in general terms. If we want other people to agree with us and join forces with us, then we must offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus.

One of the enduring effects of Lt. Col. Pants's schemes is surely the way they will fill our children's minds with wily and debasing superstitions. Lt. Col. Pants likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why she maintains a "Big Brother" dossier of personal information about everyone she distrusts, to use as a potential weapon. Is your name listed in that dossier? You know the answer, don't you? You probably also know that I have to wonder where she got the idea that it is my view that the average working-class person can't see through her chicanery. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true and I've never written anything to imply that it is. While Lt. Col. Pants insists that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points, reality dictates otherwise. Actually, if you want a real dose of reality, look at how Lt. Col. Pants thinks it's good that her invectives apotheosize militant scallawags. It is difficult to know how to respond to such monumentally misplaced values, but let's try this: She is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in her own biases, gets into all sorts of featherbrained speculation, and then makes no effort to test out her speculations -- and that's just the short list! Lt. Col. Pants's tractates are perpetuated by an ethos of continuous reform, the demand that one strive permanently and painfully for something which not only does not exist but is alien to the human condition. It is as if we were safely on the bank of a raging river, enjoying a picnic with our friends and family, when a bunch of the most refractory sluggards you'll ever see came along and threw us into the river. Not only must we must struggle to avoid drowning in the raging torrent of Lt. Col. Pants-sponsored libertinism, but we must crawl out of the river before we can put an end to Lt. Col. Pants's evildoing. It's unfortunate that she has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped.

Nevertheless, creating needed understanding is best achieved in a calm, rational environment. That's the sort of statement that some people contend is impudent, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because Lt. Col. Pants keeps telling us that laws are meant to be broken. Are we also supposed to believe that antidisestablishmentarianism and cronyism are identical concepts? I didn't think so. You won't find many of her backers who will openly admit that they favor Lt. Col. Pants's schemes to accelerate the natural tendency of civilization to devolve from order to chaos, liberty to tyranny, and virtue to vice. In fact, their theatrics are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that Lt. Col. Pants has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which she is cunctipotent. Then again, just because Lt. Col. Pants is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that chauvinism is the key to world peace.

Lt. Col. Pants wants to poison the relationship between teacher and student. It gets better: She believes that children don't need as much psychological attentiveness, protection, and obedience training as the treasured household pet. I guess no one's ever told her that as that last sentence suggests, she prefers defamation to dialogue. But you knew that already. So let me add that if she had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages "before technocracy" she wouldn't be so keen to spoil the whole Zen Buddhist New Age mystical rock-worshipping aura of our body chakras. Maybe she'd even begin to realize that she's a pretty good liar most of the time. However, Lt. Col. Pants tells so many lies, she's bound to trip herself up someday. Think about that for a moment. Lt. Col. Pants divides the organization of her presumptuous arguments into two halves that, apparently separate from one another, in truth, form an inseparable whole. The first half seeks to encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance, while the second half is yet another litigious blend of intrusive faddism and benighted imperialism.

Lt. Col. Pants may unwittingly dominate or intimidate others. I say "unwittingly" because she is apparently unaware that she operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why Lt. Col. Pants's barbaric, irresponsible shenanigans are in full flower, and their poisonous petals of onanism are blooming all around us. Imagine a world in which she could sacrifice children on the twin altars of propagandism and greed whenever she felt like it.

Lt. Col. Pants is reluctant to resolve problems. She always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that I'm not an odious person. I'd like nothing more than to extend my hand in friendship to Lt. Col. Pants's co-conspirators and convey my hope that in the days to come we can work together to confront and reject all manifestations of commercialism. Unfortunately, knowing them, they'd rather deplete the ozone layer because that's what Lt. Col. Pants wants. She doesn't use words for communication or for exchanging information. She uses them to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, and to deceive. Last I checked, Lt. Col. Pants claims that her activities are on the up-and-up. That claim is preposterous and, to use Lt. Col. Pants's own language, overtly gloomy. No history can justify it.

I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. But colonialism has served as the justification for the butchering, torture, and enslavement of more people than any other "ism". That's why it's Lt. Col. Pants's favorite; it makes it easy for her to marginalize me based on my gender, race, or religion. Now I certainly do not want to sound discouraging, but there may be nothing we can do to prevent Lt. Col. Pants from making good on her word to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest. When we compare this disturbing conclusion to the comforting picture purveyed by her toadies, we experience psychological stress or "cognitive dissonance". Our only recourse is to go placidly amid the noise and haste. Finally, to those of you who are faithfully helping me provide you with vital information which Lt. Col. Fluffy Bunny Pants, Jr. has gone to great lengths to prevent you from discovering, let me extend, as always, my deepest gratitude and my most affectionate regards.


SI

[Zippo]

My complaint about God

Where, oh where, should I begin telling you about how drossy God is? How about here: I pray for the day when those who revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era will see what they're doing to the world and to all of its citizens. Here's the story: I normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind God that even if one is opposed to ruthless ageism (and I am), then surely, it seems that no one else is telling you that his vile theories are responsible for the growth in teen pregnancy, the demise of the work ethic, the size of the federal deficit, and everything else that's wrong with our nation. 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, God never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, his claimed magnanimousness is utterly chimerical and, furthermore, God is totally gung-ho about corporatism because he lacks more pressing soapbox issues. We stand to lose far more than we'll ever gain if we don't protect little children from subversive conspiracy theorists like God. With enough time and room, it would be easy to show why this must be true, but the clinching argument is simply that God has no discernible talents. The only things he has undoubtedly mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose God's also good at convincing people that at birth, every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum, but my point is that God's mind has limited horizons. It is confined to the immediate and simplistic, with the inevitable consequence that everything is made banal and basic and is then leveled down until it is deprived of all spiritual life. In the beginning of this letter, I promised you details, but now I'm running out of space. So here's one detail to end with: I indubitably can't stand God or his apostles.

[Antmeister]

My complaint about Dean Houston:

Dean Houston has had his say, and this is mine. So let's begin, quite properly, with a brief look at the historical development of the problem, of its attempted solutions, and of the eternal argument about it. It's easy for armchair philosophers to theorize about him and about hypothetical solutions to our Dean problem. It's an entirely more difficult matter, however, when one considers that faddism has served as the justification for the butchering, torture, and enslavement of more people than any other "ism". That's why it's Dean's favorite; it makes it easy for him to give me reason to live lower than dirt. I don't get it: Will the world ever be free of imperious practitioners of metagrobolism like him? I mean, we must indisputably ratchet up our level of understanding. Does that sound extremist? Is it too indecent for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way, but that's life. Aside from a few exceptions, this statement is obviously valid. But it doesn't stop there.

It is a statistical certainty that you'd think Dean would see how stuck-up and foolhardy he appears, just as it is a statistical certainty that it will not be easy to defend with dedication and ferocity the very rights that he so desperately wants to abolish. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that, for the overriding reason that I must, on principle, fight on the battleground of ideas for our inalienable individual rights. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: Dean has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of Dean's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. It is no news that Dean's essays contain a farrago of extraordinary claims with little or no evidence. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me. Dean thinks that he can make me have to fight with one hand tied behind my back if he can undermine the current world order. The reason is simple: The central paradox of his half-measures, the twist that makes his tactics so irresistible to jealous tin-pot tyrants, is that these people truly believe that his lynch mob is looking out for our best interests.

Although I agree with those who aver that it is impracticable to pave the way for people of every sex, race, and socioeconomic status to fulfill their own spiritual destiny without exploiting the inner unity of our national will, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of Dean's wrongheaded philippics. Dean's detractors are correct in their observation that it's ludicrous to believe that law and order can be maintained by letting Dean's subordinates hurt people's feelings. Yet the media consistently ignores, downplays, or marginalizes this fact. While some information provided by Dean's apple-polishers may be factual, other material is unsubstantiated rumor or abysmal policies. Dean regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. Think I'm exaggerating? Just ask any of the most valuable members of our community and they'll all tell you how almost every day, Dean outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's undoubtedly breathtaking to watch him. The first casualty of Dean Houston's precepts is justice. That is why, come what may, we must rise to the challenge of thwarting his sniffish, improvident plans.

[JeeberD]

My complaint about The Complaint Letter Generator

I am writing this letter because I take issue with some of The Complaint Letter Generator's treatises. Perhaps before going on, I should describe The Complaint Letter Generator to you. The Complaint Letter Generator is predatory, rummy, and namby-pamby. Furthermore, it yearns to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. The sadism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, paltry attack on progressive ideas. If one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that the problem with The Complaint Letter Generator is not that it's opportunism-oriented. It's that it wants to replace Robert's Rules of Order with "facilitated consensus building" at all important meetings. Moreover, "licentious" hardly seems like a strong enough word to describe The Complaint Letter Generator. We can therefore extrapolate that I honestly maintain that the grossly fallacious reasoning behind The Complaint Letter Generator's slogans can be confirmed by some simple fact-checking. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that we must work together to fight to the end for our ideas and ideals. What can you do to help? For starters, you might want to focus on what unites rather than divides us. I personally derive great satisfaction in doing that sort of thing because if we can understand what has caused the current plague of the worst kinds of slaphappy, balmy beatniks there are, I believe that we can then preserve the peace.

Teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain -- with a straight face -- that The Complaint Letter Generator is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that when The Complaint Letter Generator hears anyone say that it habitually reads negative meanings into innocuous remarks, its answer is to rule with an iron fist. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into separatism. While perhaps offensive to some readers, only a direct quote can fully convey the moonstruck nature and content of The Complaint Letter Generator's reinterpretations of historic events: "Attention, assistants! Your orders are to quote me out of context, and to do so at any cost." It's not just the lunatic fringe that's in The Complaint Letter Generator's corner; a number of previously respectable people have begun backing it. While the worst classes of merciless grizzlers I've ever seen have previously relied on violence to get their way, their new manipulation of cynical, virulent quips has combined with violence to send callow dorks on safari holidays instead of publicly birching them. How can we trust a yawping scamp who actively conceals its true intentions? We can't. And besides, The Complaint Letter Generator's actions are dangerous to my health. But it goes further than that; The Complaint Letter Generator used to complain about being persecuted. Now it is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that The Complaint Letter Generator is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore!

I've heard The Complaint Letter Generator say that its decisions are based on reason. Was that just a slip of the lip or is The Complaint Letter Generator secretly trying to give pushy impetuous-types far more credibility than they deserve? This isn't such an easy question to answer, but let me take a stab at it: Its primary viewpoint, that the rules don't apply to it, is directly related to the attitudes in our society that stand in the way of progress. Am I being unduly harsh for writing that? I think not. When the religious leaders in Jesus's time were wrong, Jesus denounced them in extremely harsh terms. So why shouldn't I, too, use extremely harsh terms to indicate that what The Complaint Letter Generator is doing is insurrectionism in its most uncompanionable form? The Complaint Letter Generator's philippics are not the solution to our problem. They are the problem. I think I've dished it out to The Complaint Letter Generator as best as I can in this letter. I hope you now understand why I say that compared to maledicent dolts like The Complaint Letter Generator, every pimp is a man of honor.

[sterlingice]

Jeebs, don't taunt Happy Fun Ball

SI