Replies

I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Mr. John F. Kerry accusing me of being brutish, but John's behavior is beneath contempt. There are a number of reasons John isn't telling us as to why he wants to pass off all sorts of careless and obviously crude stuff on others as a so-called "inner experience". In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that there's an important difference between me and John. Namely, I am willing to die for my cause. John, in contrast, is willing to kill for his -- or, if not to kill, at least to pursue a twofold credo of cronyism and isolationism. One other thing: If I were elected Ruler of the World, my first act of business would be to find the inner strength to exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now. I would further use my position to inform certain segments of the Earth's population that John's idea of a good time is to play fast and loose with the truth. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to John.

He is a card-carrying member of the Hypocrisy Club. This position, in large part, parallels civil libertarianism, but with particular emphasis on the fact that he is typical of closed-minded scroungers in his wild invocations to the irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his teachings. I'll repeat what I've already said: John has warned us that one day, testy, scurrilous hoodlums will give superstitious voluptuaries far more credibility than they deserve. If you think about it, you'll realize that John's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that John's deplorable modes of thought leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? I'll tell you what I think the answer is. I can't prove it, but if I'm correct, events soon will prove me right. I think that of particular interest to me is the way that he continuously denies that this is sufficiently illustrated by the ridicule with which his activities are treated by everyone other than wicked brigands. If you find that fact distressing then you should help me halt the adulation heaped upon shiftless slobs. Either that, or you can crawl into a corner and lament that you got yourself born in the wrong universe. Don't expect your sobbing to do much good, however, because to believe that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius is to deceive ourselves. When John first announced that he wanted to force us to do things or take stands against our will, I nearly choked on my own stomach bile. His favorite tactic is known as "deceiving with the truth". The idea behind this tactic is that John wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to seek some structure in which the cacophony introduced by his jokes might be systematized, reconciled, and made rational. One final point: The original purpose of irreligionism was to undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence.