by kwanton on Fri May 08, 2009 11:24 am
Ok this game has gone on long enough without any leads. All this time playing it I've only seen one player that deserves my suspicion. That has to be our dear skoffin. And here's why:
I've been debating with myself over the last few weeks whether or not I should write this letter. Obviously, I outvoted myself and wrote it. I concluded I absolutely had to tell you that Skoffin's dream is for us to lay down our freedom at our feet and say to her, "Make us your slaves—but feed us". The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter but the conclusion's general outline is that it would be charitable of me not to mention that Skoffin's intellectual dishonesty, mismanagement of facts, and outright lies make jaded caitiffs seem ready for sainthood, in comparison. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity so I will instead maintain that we must raise several issues about her impolitic pranks that are frequently missing from the drivel that masquerades for discourse on this topic. If we fail then all of our sacrifices and all of the dreams and sacrifices of our ancestors will have been in vain. The key is to realize that we need to keep Skoffin's apologists at bay. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything.
As is often the case, while Skoffin insists that the ideas of "freedom" and "emotionalism" are Siamese twins, reality dictates otherwise. Actually, if you want a real dose of reality, look at how Skoffin likes destroying our moral fiber. That's the most damnable thing about her. It's also why when I first became aware of Skoffin's covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how some people have indicated that the longer we delay action, the harder it will be to find the inner strength to extirpate barbarism root, trunk, and branch. I can neither confirm nor deny that statement, but I can say that Skoffin claims to have data supporting her assertion that ebola, AIDS, mad-cow disease, and the hantavirus were intentionally bioengineered by inimical goofballs for the purpose of population reduction. Naturally, she insists that she can't actually show us that data—for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that she's hiding something. Maybe she's hiding the fact that she keeps saying that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. For some reason, Skoffin's bootlickers actually believe this nonsense.
Although I can no more change the past than see the future, it's safe to say that Skoffin has never satisfactorily proved her assertion that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. She has merely justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so." If I had to choose the most abominable specimen from her welter of xenophobic gabble, it would have to be her claim that she is a model citizen. Are you still with me? It must be pointed out over and over again to Skoffin's lackeys and, in a broader sense, to patronizing misanthropes that I am not fooled by Skoffin's dissolute and eristic rhetoric. I therefore gladly accept the responsibility of notifying others that I, not being one of the many feckless, feral hellions of this world, no longer believe that trends like family breakdown, promiscuity, and violence are random events. Not only are they explicitly glorified and promoted by Skoffin's money-grubbing, unctuous codices, but she once tried convincing me that she does the things she does "for the children". Does she think I was born yesterday? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that when I observe Skoffin's spokesmen's behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like her, they all want to rebrand local churches as faith-based emporia teeming with impulse-buy items. Also, while a monkey might think that the best way to serve one's country is to 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, the fact remains that of all of her exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "Incendiarism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us." I don't know where she came up with this, but her statement is dead wrong.
I don't believe that power corrupts Skoffin but that Skoffin corrupts power. Speaking of corruption and power, I want nothing more—or less—than to tell Skoffin where she can stick it. To that task I have consecrated my life and I invite you to do likewise.
Someone once said to me, "Giving rise to bad-tempered perverts is considered de rigueur by Skoffin's coterie." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. I don't know if Skoffin is consciously and purposely evil or merely crazy. I do know, however, that if you looked up "lecherous" in the dictionary, you'd probably see her picture.
Skoffin's premise (that we have too much freedom) is her morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Skoffin uses this disguised morality to support her hatchet jobs, thereby making her argument self-refuting. She is a standard-bearer for the unbearable. To top that off, if you've read this far then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. If Skoffin had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages "before technocracy" she wouldn't be so keen to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright factionalism. Maybe she'd even begin to realize that when her resentful utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, Skoffin appears to be saying that anyone who resists her deserves to be crushed. For me, this scornful moonshine serves only to emphasize how I can reword my point as follows. The right thing to do in this case is determined by various vectors of forces in an endless multidimensional tug-of-war involving ropes leading out in many directions.
If we contradict Skoffin, we are labelled unprofessional, ungrateful upstarts. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. I don't need to tell you that she is so confident in her own intellectual and cultural paradigm that she is blind to global realities. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that she claims that she can absorb mana by devouring her nemeses' brains. I would say that that claim is 70% folderol, 20% twaddle, and 10% another delusional attempt to abridge our basic civil liberties.
As far back as I can remember, Skoffin has pitted rascals against derelicts and criticasters against junkies. I wish I could say this nicely but I don't have much tolerance for duplicitous hippies: I want to give people more information about Skoffin, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here's one conclusion I indeed hope people draw: Skoffin parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, her ideas will change instantly like a weathercock. She is sinister, illiberal, disaffected, nutty, illogical, and smarmy. Need I go on?
I fully intend to wage war on hooliganism. That's the path that I have chosen. It's really not an easy path but then again, most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let Skoffin influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly insolent. She shouldn't remove society's moral barriers and allow perversion to prosper. That's just common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate her equivocations are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity.
I know some snippy paranoiacs who actually believe that black is white and night is day. Incredible? Those same people have told me that it's okay for her to indulge her every whim and lust without regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that there is a format Skoffin should follow for her next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts. The moral of the story: Skoffin's apparatchiks have a tendency to say very similar things about her, as if they're quoting from scripture.
VOTE SKOFFIN
Click the Esoog!
