Comments on: Jacob Sanders http://www.frouman.com/2008/01/03/jacob-sanders/ All Frouman. All the time. Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:46:32 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Helen http://www.frouman.com/2008/01/03/jacob-sanders/comment-page-1/#comment-2 Helen Wed, 09 Jan 2008 03:46:42 +0000 http://www.frouman.com/2008/01/03/jacob-sanders/#comment-2 Once again, I find it necessary to write in defense of myself and my beliefs. In the text that follows, I don't intend to recount all of the damage caused by Mr. Jacob Sanders's pouty witticisms but I do want to point out that we must reach out to the poor, the marginalized, and those unfortunate enough to have been labeled as appalling by Mr. Sanders's propaganda machine. Only then can a society free of his depraved prank phone calls blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that he wants to attack the very fabric of this nation. It gets better: He believes that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. I guess no one's ever told him that his mumpish, gruesome ultimata often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of parasitism and wowserism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain. The space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which Mr. Sanders has tried to elevate the most peremptory spielers you'll ever see to the sublime. In a rather infamous speech, he exclaimed that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. (I edited out the rest of what he said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Given the range and unpredictability of human behavior, it is quite possible that we must raise overweening junkies out of their cultural misery and lead them to the national community as a valuable, united factor. To do anything else, and I do mean anything else, is a complete waste of time. Mr. Sanders cottons to Comstockism. That's self-evident, and even Mr. Sanders would probably agree with me on that. Even so, I oppose his tactics because they are disgraceful. I oppose them because they are sexist. And I oppose them because they will obliterate our sense of identity sooner than you think. More often than not, every time Mr. Sanders tells his yes-men that courtesy and manners don't count for anything, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. It's his belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to resort to underhanded tactics. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a vulgar idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of Mr. Sanders's writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Mr. Sanders's writings to know that it's astounding that Mr. Sanders has found a way to work the words "phoneticogrammatical" and "characteristicalness" into his opinions. However, you may find it even more astounding that I wonder what would happen if he really did separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities. There's a spooky thought. And that, in my view, is our real problem. Once again, I find it necessary to write in defense of myself and my beliefs. In the text that follows, I don’t intend to recount all of the damage caused by Mr. Jacob Sanders’s pouty witticisms but I do want to point out that we must reach out to the poor, the marginalized, and those unfortunate enough to have been labeled as appalling by Mr. Sanders’s propaganda machine. Only then can a society free of his depraved prank phone calls blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that he wants to attack the very fabric of this nation. It gets better: He believes that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. I guess no one’s ever told him that his mumpish, gruesome ultimata often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of parasitism and wowserism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain. The space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which Mr. Sanders has tried to elevate the most peremptory spielers you’ll ever see to the sublime. In a rather infamous speech, he exclaimed that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. (I edited out the rest of what he said because, well, it didn’t really say anything.)

Given the range and unpredictability of human behavior, it is quite possible that we must raise overweening junkies out of their cultural misery and lead them to the national community as a valuable, united factor. To do anything else, and I do mean anything else, is a complete waste of time. Mr. Sanders cottons to Comstockism. That’s self-evident, and even Mr. Sanders would probably agree with me on that. Even so, I oppose his tactics because they are disgraceful. I oppose them because they are sexist. And I oppose them because they will obliterate our sense of identity sooner than you think.

More often than not, every time Mr. Sanders tells his yes-men that courtesy and manners don’t count for anything, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. It’s his belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to resort to underhanded tactics. I can’t understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a vulgar idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that I must admit that I’ve read only a small fraction of Mr. Sanders’s writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I’ve read enough of Mr. Sanders’s writings to know that it’s astounding that Mr. Sanders has found a way to work the words “phoneticogrammatical” and “characteristicalness” into his opinions. However, you may find it even more astounding that I wonder what would happen if he really did separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities. There’s a spooky thought. And that, in my view, is our real problem.

]]>