Sr. Paul Baker - A Complaint

This is a letter I have planned on writing for some time, a letter that I believe is extremely important and one that certainly must be heeded if we are to undo the damage caused by Sr. Paul Baker. I can think of no better place to start than by noting that Paul is more than uncompromising. He's mega-uncompromising. In fact, to understand just how uncompromising Paul is, you first need to realize that he needs to open up to the world around him. The logical consequences of that are clear: Due to Paul's repeated insistence that the purpose of education is not to produce independent thinkers but submissive state subjects, many temeritous ruffians have come to accept such asininity as undisputed truth. What should remain arguable settles into surety. Having lost their faculty for critical thinking, such people cannot comprehend that Paul's most steadfast claim is that unruly, recalcitrant blackguards and contemptible blaguers should rule this country. If there were any semblance of truth in this, I would be the last to say anything against it. As it stands, however, I can't follow Paul's pretzel logic. I do, however, know that he is locked into his present course of destruction. He does not have the interest or the will to change his fundamentally disdainful bromides.

Paul's behavior might be different if he were told that he's the pontifex maximus of insurrectionism. Of course, as far as Paul is concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, “My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts.” That's why I'm telling you that his publicity stunts all stem from one, simple, faulty premise, that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. Rather than attempting to work out his disagreements with others, Paul commonly turns to his friends tapinosis and meiosis, calling his opponents “grotty beatniks”, “bestial, macabre scandalmongers”, or even “despicable falsifiers”. I find that rather sad, primarily because what we need to do next is to do what comes naturally. This will be difficult if you can't trust anything or if you believe that a book of his writings would be a good addition to the Bible. That's why I suggest you think about how in my view, everyone should be aware of the history of Paul's coalition. Although his coalition began as a splinter faction of his petty retinue, it rapidly morphed into Paul's primary mechanism for introducing changes without testing them first. The significance of this transformation is that Paul's idea of fainéantism is not, as you might expect, a mild paraphrase for equipping the most insane Bolsheviks I've ever seen with flame throwers, hand grenades, and heat-seeking missiles. It is something else entirely: an ossified doctrine of antipathy towards those who reveal the nature and activity of Paul's underlings and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims. As evidence, consider that he just reported that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Paul's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to draw unsuspecting schmoes into the orbit of intrusive fogeys.

If Paul thinks that we can stop statism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for uncongenial, chauvinistic dopeheads, then he's sadly mistaken. You've heard me say that his toadies are all the worst kinds of inerudite, stultiloquent soi-disant do-gooders there are. True, that's a cheap shot, but too often they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that image. I want to unify our community. Paul, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it. He has mastered the dark arts of diversion and deception. And here, I aver, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in his lamentations.

Look at what's happened since Paul first ordered his idolators to con us into believing that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else: Views once considered lecherous are now considered ordinary. Views once considered obnoxious are now considered perfectly normal. And the most batty of Paul's views are now seen as gospel by legions of dastardly palterers. He should have been placed long ago in a locked psychiatric unit. I, speaking as someone who is not a slovenly hoodlum, would have committed Paul to such a facility under the justification that he has created for himself premier victim status. Paul uses this status to shield himself from scrutiny whenever he's caught acquiring public acceptance of his jejune op-ed pieces. Paul's victim status also means that Paul's critics have to be cautious when suggesting that he keeps saying that he defends the real needs of the working class. This is exemplary of the nonsensical rhetoric and scaremongering that typifies the language of slaphappy deadheads and other polyloquent couch potatoes.

The devastation caused by Paul's tractates is entropic, but it does not have to be inevitable. That is, if we are vigilant in pulling back the curtains on his positions and showing them for what they really are we will be able to sway people towards the realization that Paul has managed to convince a vast assortment of people that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. That's just further evidence that the most insidious thing in the world is nonsense that sounds just plausible enough to listen to. It's the sort of nonsense that prevents people from seeing that I love how Paul claims that clever one-liners are a valid substitute for actual thinking. Oh, never mind; I accidentally mistook his psychotic ramblings for wisdom. What I meant to say is that if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less paltry than Paul.

Implying that the key to living a long and happy life is to promote the irritating calumnies of horny inebriates is no different from implying that Paul can succeed without trying. Both statements are ludicrous. I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Granted, not everyone knows what “poluphloisboiotatotic” means, but it's nevertheless easy to understand that Paul shouldn't commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility. That would be like asking a question at a news conference and, too angry and passionate to wait for the answer, exiting the auditorium before the response. Both of those actions feed blind hatred.

Paul avers that he opposes frightful ragabashes who seek vengeance on those unrepentant souls who persist in challenging his actions. That's nothing more than ear candy. It's designed to gently stroke listeners, to get them to purr like kittens. The reality is that one could truthfully say that Paul's reportages ebb and flow with the tides of libertinism. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that if you've never seen him punish dissent through intimidation, public ridicule, economic exclusion, imprisonment, and most extremely, death, you're either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself. If Paul is going to talk about higher standards then he needs to live by those higher standards.

Paul has recently started overthrowing all concepts of beauty and sublimity, of the noble and the good, and instead dragging people down into the sphere of his own base nature. For some this development is a sign that a brave new world has arrived. For others it marks the beginning of the end of civilization. I lie in the second camp, primarily on the grounds that Paul is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees.

What I'm trying to say is that unlike the usual, yellow-bellied, garden-variety schmendrik, Paul says that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power and that therefore our unalienable rights are merely privileges that he can dole out or retract. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? Many of the most valued members of our community believe in putting the fear of God into Paul. Paul, on the other hand, believes in casting the world into nuclear holocaust. I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In particular, I hope you can see that even if one is opposed to untoward exhibitionism (as I am) then, surely, Paul's most impulsive tactic is to fabricate a phony war between evil thought police and diversivolent, immature simps. This way, he can subjugate both groups into fleecing us. I decidedly don't want that to happen, which is why I'm telling you that if you don't think that Paul's atavistic values lead him to ascribe opinions to me that I don't even hold, then you've missed the whole point of this letter.

All I can tell you is what matters to me: Paul's codices are destructive. They're morally destructive, socially destructive—even intellectually destructive. And, as if that weren't enough, Paul deeply believes that 75 million years ago, a galactic tyrant named Xenu solved the overpopulation problem of his 76-planet federation by transporting the excess people to Earth, chaining them to volcanoes, and dropping H-bombs on them. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: This is not the first time I've wanted to lay the groundwork for an upcoming attempt to lead us all toward a better, brighter future. But it is the first time I realized that his policy is to provoke amateurish ogres into action. Then, Paul uses their responses in whatever way he sees fit, generally to create a mass psychology of fear about an imminent terrorist threat. Let me end this letter by pointing out that the battle to reveal the truth about Sr. Paul Baker's complaints is now joined on many fronts. We will not waver; we will not tire; we will not falter; and we will not fail.

nice

wow you don't have to get so mad dude i was just testing it out with the first thing that came to mind no need to get all pissed geez dude think you're going overboard a little maybe take a break from otx