A short rant. [About the newest Mibba moderator, Audrey T.]
I just need to get this all out in the air: the truth.
Audrey never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. She presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, she seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on her part to numb the public to the plagiarism and injustice in mainstream politics in the immediate years ahead. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that people tell me that Audrey is begging the question when she says that violence and prejudice are funny. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course.
My long-term goal is to examine Audrey's worldview from the perspective of its axiology (values) and epistemology (ways of knowing). Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, if you're like most people you just shrug your shoulders whenever you hear about Audrey's latest insults. When your shoulders get tired of shrugging I hope you'll realize that Audrey shouldn't convert our children to cultural zombies in a mass of unthinking and easily herded proletarian cattle. 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 vandalize our neighborhoods.
Audrey seems to assume that principles don't matter. This is an assumption of the worst kind because in a rather infamous speech, she exclaimed that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Audrey herself). (I edited out the rest of what Audrey said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Her intransigent, incorrigible vaporings are fraught with the gravest consequences. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to investigate her incomprehensible principles, ideals, and objectives. Audrey's idiotic claim that men are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—is just that, an idiotic claim.
Comments on the above are welcome, but please think them out first.
Audrey never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. She presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, she seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on her part to numb the public to the plagiarism and injustice in mainstream politics in the immediate years ahead. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that people tell me that Audrey is begging the question when she says that violence and prejudice are funny. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course.
My long-term goal is to examine Audrey's worldview from the perspective of its axiology (values) and epistemology (ways of knowing). Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, if you're like most people you just shrug your shoulders whenever you hear about Audrey's latest insults. When your shoulders get tired of shrugging I hope you'll realize that Audrey shouldn't convert our children to cultural zombies in a mass of unthinking and easily herded proletarian cattle. 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 vandalize our neighborhoods.
Audrey seems to assume that principles don't matter. This is an assumption of the worst kind because in a rather infamous speech, she exclaimed that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Audrey herself). (I edited out the rest of what Audrey said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Her intransigent, incorrigible vaporings are fraught with the gravest consequences. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to investigate her incomprehensible principles, ideals, and objectives. Audrey's idiotic claim that men are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—is just that, an idiotic claim.
Comments on the above are welcome, but please think them out first.
Posted on September 26th, 2009 at 02:20am
What...? XD
MaryJulianna, September 26th, 2009 at 11:51:48pm
Look at how frightened these two girls (and I mean that in the strongest sense of the word) are.
@Audrey T.
Clearly you are misguided. However, it is neither here nor there for me to speak about such fictitious folly you spew regarding my temperaments. Those who do support me have given me support with such a personal confidence in my character that to suggest otherwise is downright ludicrous and borderline blasphemous against all which I stand for.
But you are so conniving and deceitful that an uneducated eye would easily make the mistake of falling for your smoke and mirror tricks. I tried to present you in a pleasing light, but it is obvious that you no longer feel the need for such pleasantries. But how can I not be surprised by this? You surround yourself with such idiocy and intolerance that it was only a matter of time before you became some uncivilized beast. So for you, I offer a suggestion: dump that which darkens your soul. It does not bode well for you now or in the future. You have my pity.
@Jinxeh
Perhaps I have so much support because, unlike someone of your impropriety, I do possess capabilities to lead. Clearly, those who you have garnered support from was done so under the dark cloak of lies and slander.
Jinxeh claims that I believe “sin is good for the soul,” but has anyone analyzed the situation we often find her in? Just take a quick peek at some of her past events, and it is easy to see that not only does she relish in sin, she is completely devoured in it. Others have simply wrote this off as confusion, but there is no perplexity involved; only impurity. She is tainted, and everyone she comes into contact falls victim to her rabbit hole of twists and turns. There are no rules in her world. Is it any wonder that her followers walked around looking dazed and confused?
Dancing Caveman, September 26th, 2009 at 04:31:43am
What's up with the long comments? D:
Rainbow.Puke., September 26th, 2009 at 03:51:10am
I was prepared for you to comment back to this, Dancing Caveman. And as such: it is time to express my concerns about Dancing Caveman and, more specifically, her sophistries regarding dysfunctional polemics of one sort or another. What follows is the story of how Dancing Caveman can be so rich in the rhetoric of democracy and yet so poor in its implementation. Did she get dropped on her head when she was young, or did Dancing Caveman take massive doses of drugs to believe that the moon is made of green cheese? Personally, I don't believe the answer has anything to do with expansionism. Rather, I believe it involves Dancing Caveman's tendency to exert more and more control over other individuals. I do not find activities that are raving, profligate, and stupid to be "funny". Maybe I lack a sense of humor but maybe her imprecations oscillate between nugatory communism and uncouth anti-intellectualism. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Dancing Caveman's argument that sin is good for the soul is hopelessly flawed and thoroughly circuitous.
What's scary is that support for Dancing Caveman's vengeful memoranda is spreading like a prairie fire among incompetent brigands. I don't know why that is, but I do know that Dancing Caveman keeps telling everyone within earshot that she has achieved sainthood. I'm guessing that Dancing Caveman read that on some Web site of dubious validity. More reliable sources generally indicate that it's dodgy for her to deploy enormous resources in a war of attrition against helpless citizens. Or perhaps I should say, it's boisterous. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the laws of nature don't apply to Dancing Caveman. Admittedly, that's about as likely as Elvis materializing in my room tonight and singing Heartbreak Hotel. Still, the possibility does help one realize that I try never to argue with Dancing Caveman because it's clear she's not susceptible to reason. That's our situation today, in very rough outline. Of course, I've left out a thousand details and refinements and qualifications. I've not mentioned that Dancing Caveman's hopelessly in love with the sound of her own voice. And I've ignored racialism altogether. I've simply pointed out one key fact: Society should recognize that she is out of control and must be stopped.
And Audrey T.: I won't bother discussing the flaws in your logic because you clearly don't use any logic. Your success comes from your prowess at marketing your stinking roorbacks to an impressionable but not particularly discerning public. And I can say that with a clear conscience because I've tried to explain to your morbid minions that you oppress your critics by crushing them, expelling them, pauperizing them, and cutting them off from families and friends. As could be expected, they were a bit slow on the uptake. I just couldn't get them to comprehend that I don't know which are worse, right-wing tyrants or left-wing tyrants. But I do know that you insist that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands you perpetrate. One personality trait that's common to many raucous casuists is arrogance—a trait that you have in abundance. And that's all I have to say.
Jinxeh, September 26th, 2009 at 03:49:36am
@Jinxeh I will not waste my time criticizing or insulting Jinxeh as 1) she is unlikely to change, and 2) Jinxeh probably revels in the letters of shock and repulsion that she regularly receives. Instead, I will focus on her feckless declamations, which, after all, are the things that adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Let me cut to the chase: If we contradict her, we are labeled stinking, disorganized rascals. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. She wants to cause people to betray one another and hate one another. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. If Jinxeh's deputies had even an ounce of integrity they would disseminate as widely as possible all of the information we have regarding Jinxeh's abhorrent comments. I find Jinxeh's bons mots rather lame-brained, don't you?
@Dancing Caveman I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere. What if we collectively just told Dancing Caveman's bedfellows, "Sure, go ahead and rip apart causes that others feel strongly about. Have fun!"? That would be worse than mephitic; it would dominate the whole earth and take possession of all its riches. Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that Dancing Caveman is a paragon of morality and wisdom. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, whenever she claims that it's okay if her tricks initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend, I can't help but think that she has just subtracted from the sum of human knowledge.
Audrey T., September 26th, 2009 at 03:27:47am
My dear friends, what we have here is quite a dynamic discord between two opposite people. On one hand, we have the dewy-eyed, love child of peace and happiness and the opposing sturdy, headstrong, rough-and-tough warrior. While time have proven that opposites can attract, it is not often without conflict and contention.
Both are often seen cavorting about on our site; exposing their own thoughts on varying issues, and while both seem to often be in accordance, there are still divergences in how each thought is delivered. Audrey is more concerned with not ruffling tail feathers while Jinxeh thrives on abrasive quarreling. It was only a matter of time before these two finally divulged their true thoughts about the other.
But not to fear. All is well between the two opposing forces; after all- which differences often comes a sort of balance. They both reserve (and relish) in the right to reveal their true feelings of each other.
Dancing Caveman, September 26th, 2009 at 03:21:35am
v I have a few points of contention with you, Audrey. Here's my side of the story, everyone: Audrey demands obeisance from her brethren. Then, once they prove their loyalty, Audrey forces them to eat our nation to its bones. If the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to take the lemons that she's handing us and make lemonade. Audrey is a myth-generating machine. Whatever weight we accord to that fact, we may be confident that there are lots of weepy, wimpy flower children out there who are always whining that I'm being too harsh in my criticisms of Audrey. I wish such people would wake up and realize that we must act honorably. Only then can a society free of her confused, dastardly rodomontades blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that I intend to argue about her initiatives. That's the path that I have chosen. It's indisputably not an easy path, but then again, Audrey's ebullitions are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. It is time for someone to inculcate in the reader an inquisitive spirit and a skepticism about beliefs that Audrey T's fans take for granted.
Jinxeh, September 26th, 2009 at 02:49:18am
I wanted to respond earlier, but I was so busy, I simply did not have the time. Nevertheless, what I need to say is so important, I knew I simply had to allocate a few minutes to write a brief letter on the subject. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that Jinxeh attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous "meanings" to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, she calls you "fearful and withdrawn". If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, Jinxeh says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does she say such things? I could give you the answer now but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that the last time I heard her ramble on in her characteristically bibulous blather she said something about wanting to violate all the rules of decorum. I feel sorry for the human race when I hear stuff like that.
As a general rule, I am certain that if I asked the next person I meet if he would want Jinxeh to use threats of harm to coerce misguided dirtbags into forcing me to die in oppression, chaos, and despair, he would say no. Yet we all stand idly by while Jinxeh claims that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la. I challenge her to point out any text in this letter that proposes that everything is happy and fine and good. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing. In closing, I am getting tired of sweeping up after Jinxeh’s fiascoes.
Audrey T., September 26th, 2009 at 02:40:12am