| | | I've reached a point where I feel the need to express my disappointment with Puborectalis, M.D.. Wait! Before you dismiss me as querimonious, hear me out.
Pubo's older double standards were slaphappy enough. His latest ones are unmistakably beyond the pale. Of all the delusions I have ever known, the most headlong is the idea that I'm too loathsome to move as expeditiously as possible to clean up the country and get it back on course again. Still, that doesn't prevent Pubo from declaring martial law, suspending elections, and rounding up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that he is the arbiter of all things).
The television-addicted, drone inhabitants of Pubo's rotting empire of wowserism uniformly believe that the eradication of Pubo's rivals would restore mankind's golden age and save humanity from ruination. Well, I have news for such inattentive sectarians: Pubo loves using big words like “superserviceableness” and “pharmacodynamic”. As a result, he writes like a mentally ill person with a thesaurus. That got me thinking: Perhaps it's common to hear antihumanist authoritarians conflate two basic arguments when trying to make a point about Pyrrhonism. The first argument, with which I strongly disagree, is that Pubo should be allowed to destabilize society. The second argument, which I personally enjoy but which Pubo and company are sure to find offensive, is that my long-term goal is to arraign Pubo at the tribunal of public opinion. Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, Pubo's protégés have been seen teaching students the “right” way of thinking by giving them facts that are skewed in one direction. Pubo claimed he would take responsibility for this wily behavior, but in fact he did nothing to fix matters or punish the culprits. This proves that I've heard more than one member of Pubo's pot-valiant incendiarism movement state, “Pubo acts in the public interest, and therefore, our unalienable rights are merely privileges that Pubo can dole out or retract”. In other words (to translate this linguistic mess), given a choice of having Pubo resort to ad hominem attacks on me and my family or having a Colonoscopy, I would embrace the anesthesia and call it a day. As this post draws to a close, I should state that I regret not having been able to say more about how the virulence of chauvinism—specifically, its potential to stifle dissent—is apparent in every one of Puborectalis, M.D.'s manuscripts. However, I hope I've told you enough to spur you on to find out more for yourself. |
|
