[ale] Like Anxiety Closet only Obnoxiousness

[Hogg, Russell E.]

I agree,
As entertaining as that was I can't imagine it could have taken place
without some sort of low grade speed.

Vivarin perhaps..  Or lots of caffeine..




____________________________________________
Russell.Hogg at OPM.gov
x2367




-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Popovitch [mailto:jimpop at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 11:47 PM
To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
Subject: Re: [ale] Like Anxiety Closet only Obnoxiousness


Geeze.  You wrote ALL of that about one person.  Get a life. ;)

-Jim P.

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 21:29, Daquarious Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:27:07 -0700 fostermail at bellsouth.net wrote:
> >I have a bunch of things I can't really look up because- I'll say I 
> >feel ill-used by my employer, or I'm ADHD, (and lifetimes past
> >adolescence,) or maybe I'm the turntable receipient in Clinton's 
> >book, which I haven't read, because when my check clears at my
> [FLUSH]
> 
> I want to share with you a very deep concern I have about Mr. 
> Fostermail. But before I continue, allow me to explain that there is 
> something grievously wrong with those huffy used-car salesmen who 
> distract attention from more important issues. Shame on the lot of 
> them! It's not easy for me to say this, but his slogans are exemplary 
> of the forces minorities must fight in their struggle to achieve equal 
> footing with the rest of the community. There, I said it. Now I can 
> continue with my previous point, which is that if you were to tell 
> Fostermail that he is doing the very thing for which he criticizes 
> others, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around 
> himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world.
> 
> There is good reason to believe that when he says that he can override 
> nature, in his mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like he 
> believes he has said something very profound. Fostermail says that he 
> needs a little more time to clean up his act. As far as I'm concerned,
> 
> Fostermail's time has run out.
> 
> Many of Fostermail's opinions are seriously flawed, frequently fail to 
> meet minimal standards of logic, and, on balance, are repressive. It 
> is also worthy of note that many people are incredulous when I tell 
> them that Fostermail intends to annihilate a person's personality, 
> individuality, will, and character. "How could Fostermail be so 
> annoying?", they ask me. "It doesn't seem possible." Well, it is 
> undeniably possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Fostermail plans 
> to do it. But first, you need to realize that the biggest difference 
> between me and Fostermail is that Fostermail wants to encourage men to 
> leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy 
> capitalism, and become damnable anarchists. I, on the other hand, want 
> to take personal action and point out that the emperor has no clothes 
> on. Ostensibly, he does not intend to write off whole sections of 
> society, but in fact, I oppose his platitudes because they are 
> foolish. I oppose them because they are immature. And I oppose them 
> because they will inflict untold misery, suffering, and distress 
> eventually. Fostermail's proposed social programs are not our only 
> concern. To state the matter in a few words, Fostermail pompously 
> claims that he never engages in blockish, grungy, or heartless 
> politics. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately.
> 
> Must it be explained to him that any correspondence between what he 
> says and the truth is purely coincidental? Because he obviously 
> doesn't realize that I've heard of contentious things like communism 
> and pessimism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher 
> moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves -- 
> ideas which his ignorant, unthinking, reckless brain is too small to 
> understand. I find that some of Fostermail's choices of words in his 
> actions would not have been mine. For example, I would have 
> substituted "unambitious" for "homeotransplantation" and "litigious" 
> for "extraterritoriality." There is no place in this country where we 
> are safe from Fostermail's acolytes, no place where we are not 
> targeted for hatred and attack. It's possible that Fostermail doesn't 
> realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of 
> negativism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we put 
> the kibosh on his politics.
> 
> Hypersensitive pseudo-intellectuals are more susceptible to his 
> brainwashing tactics than are any other group. Like water, their minds 
> take the form of whatever receptacle Fostermail puts them in. They 
> then lose all recollection that I and Fostermail part company when it 
> comes to the issue of radicalism. He feels that he should put a horny 
> spin on important issues because "it's the right thing to do", while I
> maintain that I am aware that many people may object to the severity
> of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I aver
> that there is, because he should learn to appreciate what he has
> instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he
> wants, every time he wants to. Fostermail can't seriously believe that
> might makes right, can he? There aren't enough hours in the day to
> fully answer that question, but consider this: Fostermail's
> ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his
> core principle has remained the same: to understate the negative
> impact of paternalism. If you don't believe me, then note that the
> purpose of this letter is far greater than to prove to you how
> nefarious and brazen Fostermail has become. The purpose of this letter
> is to get you to start thinking for yourself, to start thinking about
> how his ratiocination skills are nothing to write home about. I don't
> think anyone questions that. But did you know that vindictive
> pauperism is his preferred quick-fix solution to complex cultural
> problems? This in mind, I would like to carry out this matter to the
> full extent of the law. What is happening between Fostermail's
> lieutenants and us is not a debate. It is not a friendly disagreement
> between enlightened people. It is an unbalanced attack on our most
> cherished institutions. Some readers may doubt that Fostermail is
> self-serving enough to spoil the whole Zen Buddhist New Age mystical
> rock-worshipping aura of our body chakras. So let me provide some
> evidence. But before I do, let me just say that he has been deluding
> people into believing that society is supposed to be lenient towards
> the most sullen slaves to fashion you'll ever see. Don't let him
> delude you, too.
> 
> It's hard to fathom just how footling he is. The sooner he comes to 
> grips with that reality, the better for all of us. Even if slaphappy 
> thieves join Fostermail's band with the best of intentions, they will 
> still display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations in the blink 
> of an eye. Not all, I hasten to add, do join with the best of 
> intentions.
> 
> Fostermail doesn't want us to know about his plans to introduce more 
> restrictions on our already dwindling freedoms. Otherwise, we might do 
> something about that. If he is going to talk about higher standards, 
> then he needs to live by those higher standards. While we may all pray 
> for a perfect utopian world in which everyone is holding hands and 
> singing "We Are the World" in perfect harmony, the blunt reality is 
> that we must reach out to people with the message that Fostermail's 
> hypocrisy comes out when he denies that he surrounds himself with 
> violent dotty-types. We must alert people of that. We must educate 
> them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to justify 
> condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his 
> sanctimonious imprecations.
> 
> No matter what Fostermail thinks, if he can give us all a succinct and 
> infallible argument proving that the sky is falling, I will personally 
> deliver his Nobel Prize for Slovenly Rhetoric. In the meantime, 
> Fostermail is not interested in what is true and what is false or in 
> what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no 
> meaning to him whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to 
> Fostermail is sensationalism. Why? The answer is obvious if you 
> understand that a great many of us don't want Fostermail to deplete 
> the ozone layer. But we feel a prodigious pressure to smile, to be 
> nice, and not to object to his indecent viewpoints. If Fostermail had 
> done his homework, he'd know that his "I'm right and you're wrong" 
> attitude is vicious, because it leaves no room for compromise. If 
> someone were to demand special treatment that, in many cases, borders 
> on the ridiculous, I'd rather it be an army of unpatriotic ratbags 
> than he, because the latter is illiberal, while the former are only 
> muzzy-headed. If Fostermail ever claims that the rest of us are an 
> inferior group of people, fit only to be enslaved, beaten, and 
> butchered at the whim of our betters, we must answer only one thing: 
> "No, the reverse is true."
> 
> I don't mean to scare you, but he might use both overt and covert 
> deceptions to convert lush forests into arid deserts by the next full 
> moon. What are we to do then? Place blinders over our eyes and hope we 
> don't see the horrible outcome? To Hell with him! One can consecrate 
> one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. 
> Fostermail, however, is more likely to transmogrify society's petty 
> gripes and irrational fears into "issues" to be catered to. Every time 
> he tells his slaves that the majority of macabre, heartless 
> humanity-haters are heroes, if not saints, their eyes roll into the 
> backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of 
> unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question.
> 
> Contrary to the impression that self-satisfied bloodsuckers offer 
> "new," "innovative," and "advanced" ideas, there is little new in 
> their whinges. Fostermail's orations are just an outcropping of his 
> hatred of us. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is 
> that his mercenaries maintain that he can walk on water. I say to 
> them, "Prove it" -- not that they'll be able to, of course, but 
> because if I had to choose the most noxious specimen from Fostermail's 
> welter of illaudable gabble, it would have to be Fostermail's claim 
> that it's okay for him to indulge his every whim and lust without 
> regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. Fostermail says that 
> honor counts for nothing. Yet he also wants to pit race against race,
> 
> religion against religion, and country against country. Am I the only 
> one who sees the irony there? I ask because I and Fostermail part 
> company when it comes to the issue of gangsterism. He feels that women 
> are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even 
> remotely phallic in shape, while I think that his coadjutors must be 
> exposed and neutralized wherever they lurk, so to speak.
> 
> Fostermail's standard operating procedure is to lower our standard of 
> living. At the risk of sounding a tad redundant, let me add that I 
> like to face facts. I like to look reality right in the eye and not 
> pretend it's something else. And the reality of our present situation 
> is this: He maliciously defames and damagingly misrepresents everyone 
> and everything around him. There's a word for that: libel. Many 
> experts now believe that Fostermail's statements such as "Skin color 
> means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius" 
> indicate that we're not all looking at the same set of facts. 
> Fortunately, these facts are easily verifiable with a trip to the 
> library by any open and honest individual. For those who need very 
> specific examples in order to grasp the significance of Fostermail's 
> agendas, I'll give a very specific example: Think for a moment about 
> the way that we should agree on definitions before saying anything 
> further about Fostermail's shameless "compromises". For starters, 
> let's say that "irreligionism" is "that which makes Fostermail yearn 
> to lock people up for reading the 'wrong' kinds of books or listening 
> to the 'wrong' sorts of music." Have you ever stopped to consider the 
> enormous havoc and ruin that has been wrought in this world by him and 
> his buddies? I have. That's why I say that it's only rational to 
> think, "Fostermail's favorite activities include cheating, lying, and 
> tricking people into believing that all major world powers are 
> controlled by a covert group of 'insiders'". Sadly, lack of space 
> prevents me from elaborating further.
> 
> I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "Fostermail 
> has completely stepped off the deep end." I included that quote not 
> because it is exceptional in any way, but rather, because it is 
> typical of much of the mail I receive. I included it to show you that 
> I'm not the only one who thinks that Fostermail likes jokes that send 
> children to die as martyrs for causes that he is unwilling to die for 
> himself. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to 
> ask me, I'd say that everything I've said so far is by way of 
> introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key 
> point is that one does not have to progressively narrow the sphere of 
> human freedom in order to encourage individuals to come out of their 
> cocoons and flourish. It is a primitive person who believes otherwise. 
> Now, I'm no fan of Fostermail's, but still, Fostermail has announced 
> his intentions to besmirch the memory of some genuine historic 
> figures. While doing so may earn Fostermail a gold star from the 
> mush-for-brains commercialism crowd, only the impartial and 
> unimpassioned mind will even consider that this is typical of the kind 
> of noise he enjoys making. I don't think anyone questions that. But 
> did you know that he advertises his strict morality solely to shift 
> attention away from his many vices? There are two related questions in 
> this matter. The first is to what extent Fostermail has tried to 
> destroy the heart and fabric of our nation. The other is whether or 
> not Fostermail can fool some of the people all of the time. He can 
> fool all of the people some of the time. But he can't fool all of the 
> people all of the time. Consequently, he takes things out of context,
> 
> twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so 
> the reader can check up on him. Fostermail also ignores all of the 
> evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) 
> his position. Summa summarum, one can see the blood-lust in Mr. 
> Fostermail's eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get
> secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2
> 
> Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger 
> http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434
> 
> Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program:
> http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale


-------------------------------
--  Even though this E-Mail has been scanned and found clean of  
--  known viruses, OPM can not guarantee this message is virus free.
-------------------------------
--  This message was automatically generated.
-------------------------------oi


-------------------------------
--  Even though this E-Mail has been scanned and found clean of  
--  known viruses, OPM can not guarantee this message is virus free.
-------------------------------
--  This message was automatically generated.
-------------------------------ro

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...