Jump to content

My complaint about our fair state...

krazeeboi

By krazeeboi
in South Carolina

Recommended Posts

krazeeboi Gigalopolis

krazeeboi

Posted
Posted

Well, I knew it was coming. In fact, I predicted it quite a long time ago when I said that the state of South Carolina would make conditions far worse than could ever have been the case without the state's lascivious efforts. And now that it has, we must surely convince the federal government to clamp down hard on the state's recommendations. What follows is the story of how the state of South Carolina can be so rich in the rhetoric of democracy and yet so poor in its implementation. We must acknowledge as a people that I am appalled that I have cause to write this article. That being the case, we sincerely can infer that it's mad for the state of South Carolina to overthrow western civilization through the destruction of its four pillars -- family, nation, religion, and democracy. Or perhaps I should say, it's morally questionable.

Now, I don't want to overwork the story about how our fair state plans to humiliate, subjugate, and eventually, eliminate everyone who wants to reveal the nature and activity of its adulators and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims, so let's just say that it's our responsibility to take up the mantle and tell it like it is. That's the first step in trying to arraign it at the tribunal of public opinion, and it's the only way to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that mold the mind of virtually every citizen -- young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated. It is therefore reasonable to infer that the state of South Carolina claims to be fighting for equality. What it's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that the state, or rather the state's leadership, likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why someone has to be willing to find the inner strength to serve on the side of Truth. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that the Earth is flat. One of South Carolina's former hangers-on, shortly after having escaped from the state of South Carolina's iron veil of monolithic thought, stated, "According to the dictionary, 'the state of South Carolina-ism' is 'any of a set of cop-outs that impose stingy new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of jackbooted drive for power'." This comment is typical of those who have finally realized that South Carolina is the embodiment of everything petty in our lives. Every grievance, every envy, every brain-damaged ideology finds expression in the state of South Carolina. Sorry for babbling so much, but my contempt for the state of South Carolina is boundless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Charleston native Burg

Charleston native

Posted
Posted

:rofl:

I have a complaint about Mary Clark, one of the leaders of the absurd incorporation of James Island:

This is an open letter, which you are welcome to use as you wish. I want as many people as possible to know that Ms. Mary Clark never seems to listen to anyone else's positions and reasoning. Let me preface my discussion by quickly reasserting a familiar theme of my previous letters: Ms. Clark has written volumes about how she is a paragon of morality and wisdom. Don't believe a word of it, though. The truth is that her acolytes say, "It is Ms. Clark's moral imperative to preach a propaganda of hate." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to lay out some ideas and interpretations that hold the potential for insight. I want to make an impartial and well-informed evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of Ms. Clark's vituperations. That may seem simple enough, but life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is Ms. Clark so compelled to complain about situations over which she has no control? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that when people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Ms. Clark is to blame. Ms. Clark managed to convince a bunch of muzzy-headed scrubs to help her undermine serious institutional and economic analyses and replace them with a diverting soap opera of pugnacious conspiracies. What was the quid pro quo there? In other words, does she believe, deep in the adytum of her own mind, that honor counts for nothing? I'll tell you the answer in a moment. But first, let me just say that there is a simple answer to the question of what to do about her orations. The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must reinforce notions of positive self esteem. However much she may deny it, any rational argument must acknowledge this. Her bitter pleas, naturally, do not. Verily, you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with dictatorial marauders?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that if I try really, really hard, I can almost see why Ms. Clark would want to usher in the rule of the Antichrist and the apocalyptic end times.

Her hirelings assert that "Ms. Clark's opinions represent the opinions of the majority -- or even a plurality." First off, that's a lousy sentence. If they had written that Ms. Clark's unedifying preoccupation with metagrobolism will make serious dialogue difficult or impossible before the year is over, then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, we mustn't let Ms. Clark spit on sacred icons. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. Like other disdainful loonies, she has a finely honed ability to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. The sooner she comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. If Ms. Clark can't be reasoned out of her prejudices, she must be laughed out of them. If Ms. Clark can't be argued out of her selfishness, she must be shamed out of it. Finally, if this letter generates a response from someone of opposing viewpoints, I would hope that the author(s) concentrate on offering objections to my ideas while refraining from attacks on my person or my intelligence. I've gotten enough of that already from Ms. Mary Clark.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.