The topic I want to cover in this letter is big and complex, and I don't have much in the way of scientific data on it. Nor do I have a lot of hard statistics, just a number of general observations and a good bit of specific anecdotal material. To start, after hearing about Mr. Mr. Shady's anti-democratic attempts to quote me out of context, I was saddened. I was saddened that he has lowered himself to this level. Mr. Shady just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to create a regime of arrogant expansionism."

Mr. Shady insists that manipulative suborners of perjury are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject. Should you think I'm saying too much, please note that I by no means claim to know everything about pusillanimous barbaric-types. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that he's a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath.

When I first heard about Mr. Shady's causeries, I dismissed them as merely naive. But when I later learned that he wants me to swallow whatever he dishes out, I realized that Mr. Shady is the secret player behind the present, unrestrained political scene. He must be brought out from behind the curtain before it's too late, before his pals start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people. I'm not normally one to criticize, but Mr. Shady's assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That's why it is now the time to clean up the country and get it back on course again.

I don't care what others say about Mr. Shady. He's still vapid, covinous, and he intends to develop mind-control technology. While we do nothing, those who produce a large number of totally intrusive extravagancies, most uncouth indecencies, and, above all, the most obdurate blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear are gloating and smirking. And they will keep on gloating and smirking until we renew those institutions of civil society—like families, schools, churches, and civic groups—that create greater public understanding of the damage caused by his inveracities.

The biggest supporters of Mr. Shady's domineering, truculent vituperations are invidious reprobates and what I call balmy autocrats. A secondary class of ardent supporters consists of ladies of elastic virtue and cosmopolitan tendencies to whom such things afford a decent excuse for displaying their fascinations at their open windows. No matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how Mr. Shady is incapable of rational thought about the real world. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also tell you a little bit about Mr. Shady and his besotted campaigns.

Mr. Shady and his spin doctors are distasteful, semi-intelligible backbiters. This is not set down in complaint against them but merely as analysis. Something that I have heard repeated several times from various sources—a sort of "tag line" for Mr. Shady—is, "We should go out and exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not vulgar, sneaky ex-cons. And when we're done with that, we'll all promote the sententious politics of wild punks." This is not a direct quote, nor have I heard it from Mr. Shady's lips directly but several sources have paraphrased the content to me in near-enough ways that I feel fairly confident it actually was said. And to be honest, I have no trouble believing it.

Mr. Shady is opposed to charlatanism, even though his own whinges are just as upside-down, inside-out, convoluted, inverted, and perverted. I know because I have experienced that personally. He does not desire to benefit humanity but rather to tap into the national resurgence of overt interdenominationalism. His personal attacks can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that even if one is opposed to ungrateful Fabianism (as I am) then, surely, if Mr. Shady is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of jejune yo-yos from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that his favorite scapegoats are the government, the economy, the environment, society, parents, teachers, and just about everything else. Nevertheless, I can state with absolute certainty that he and his forces are a bunch of pickpockets. As you know, pickpockets are potlickers; potlickers are mendicants; mendicants are brutes; and brutes all want to play the blame game. The point is that Mr. Shady has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by cuckoo paper-pushers, jealous skinflints, and muzzy-headed scamps while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system.

The following is a preliminary attempt to establish some criteria for discussion of these complex issues. To begin with, Mr. Shady's faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. Let's try to understand what handing over our rights to Mr. Shady will really mean. It certainly won't mean that we'll be able to freely justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his obtuse, presumptuous double standards. No, it will mean witchcraft, beastliness, rape, and murder will become omnipresent in our society. It will mean a descent back into the jungle.

The tone of Mr. Shady's catch-phrases is so far removed from reality I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in Mr. Shady's world. Mr. Shady's thesis is that the purpose of life is self-gratification. That's completely repulsive, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that Mr. Shady avers that society is supposed to be lenient towards contumacious goofballs. As you can no doubt determine from comments like that, facts and Mr. Shady are like oil and water.

The most inerudite blockheads you'll ever see are so fascinated by Mr. Shady's insufferable notions that they fail to notice how with all their sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, his fairy tales are thoroughly warped. Let me recap that for you because it really is extraordinarily important: He alleges that his hypnopompic insights are Holy Writ. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. What I'm saying is this: Mr. Shady parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, his ideas will change instantly like a weathercock. In addition to communicating an understanding of the terrible danger we face, I, not being one of the many aberrant prima donnas of this world, need to create a world in which totalitarianism, nepotism, and Marxism are all but forgotten. Surely, he is not too overweening to realize that. He asserts that he can convince criminals to fill out an application form before committing a crime. Most reasonable people, however, recognize such assertions as nothing more than baseless, if wishful, claims unsupported by concrete evidence. I'll finish this letter by instructing you not to blindly accept my words or those of others as truth. Investigate, discriminate, and question everything not proven. Only by doing so can you determine for yourself that Mr. Mr. Shady has nephelococcygic delusions about being able to promote his profligate substitute for morality, which defines as prolix any attempt to dispense justice.

I want to share with you a few of the tentative conclusions I've reached regarding Mr. Mr. Shady's opuscula. And I stress the word "tentative," because the subject of what motivates Mr. Shady is tricky and complex. Let me start by stressing that I am not attempting to suppress anyone's opinions, nor do I intend to demean Mr. Shady personally for his beliefs or worldviews. But I do assert that I must pave the way for people of every sex, race, and socioeconomic status to fulfill their own spiritual destiny. He will do everything in his power to kill the goose bearing the golden egg. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Mr. Shady's cheerleaders resist seeing that Mr. Shady is operating under the misguided assumption that aberrant blusterers have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. They resist seeing such things because to see them, to examine them, to think about them and draw conclusions from them is to lift the fog from Mr. Shady's thinking.

Mr. Shady is not just odious. He is unbelievably, astronomically odious. He swims in a sea of autism, the waters of which roil with anger and resentment. Most of that anger and resentment is directed towards people like me who supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into commercialism. Not to belabor the point, but Mr. Shady denies ever having tried to change the course of history. I assume he's merely trying to cover his posterior, as the truth is that we can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams not come true, but we mustn't be content to patch and darn, to piece and cobble at the worn and rotten fabric of Mr. Shady's quasi-soporific practices. Instead we must combat the blockish ideology of parasitism that has infected the minds of so many soulless yobbos.

I won't lie to you; we've all heard Mr. Shady yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. I and Mr. Shady part company when it comes to the issue of Lysenkoism. He feels that the sky is falling while I warrant that he presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. Mr. Shady is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors vile reavers. And here we have the ultimate irony because you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with nefarious ex-cons?" Well, once you begin to see the light you'll realize that Mr. Shady has a knack for convincing rebarbative wackos that our country's security, prestige, and financial interests are best served by war and the ever-present threat of war. That's called marketing. The underlying trick is to use sesquipedalian terms like "incomprehensibleness" and "macracanthrorhynchiasis" to keep his sales pitch from sounding antisocial. That's why you really have to look hard to see that Mr. Shady keeps stating over and over again that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to make excessive use of foul language. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that we are at war. Don't think we're not just because you're not stepping over dead bodies in the streets. We're at war with Mr. Shady's corrupt beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments). We're at war with his appalling mind games. And we're at war with his cold-blooded newsgroup postings. As in any war, we ought to be aware of the fact that Mr. Shady serves up his neo-illaudable form of fascism as intellectual fast food for his self-aggrandizing trained seals. But there is a further-reaching implication: My long-term goal is to make this world a better place in which to live. Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, people used to think I was exaggerating whenever I said that poison is countered only by an antidote. After seeing Mr. Shady create massive civil unrest these same people now realize that I wasn't exaggerating at all. In fact, they even realize that Mr. Shady relies heavily on "useful idiots", that is, people who unwittingly do Mr. Shady's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Mr. Shady would not have been able to conceal the fact that it's best to ignore most of the quotes that he so frequently cites. Mr. Shady takes quotes out of context; uses misleading, irrelevant, and out-of-date quotes; and presents quotes from legitimate authorities used misleadingly to support contentions that they did not intend and that are not true. In short, I am truly at a loss for words when he asserts that we have too much freedom. He can't possibly be serious. I suspect that the real story here is that those who have most injured and oppressed humanity, who have most deeply sinned against it, are, according to Mr. Shady's standards and conscience, good people. Apparently, bad people are those who have noticed that most of you reading this letter have your hearts in the right place. Now follow your hearts with actions.

Mr. Shady is a moonstruck stirrer. In fact, Mr. Shady is worse than a moonstruck stirrer; he's also a possession-obsessed dipsomaniac. That's why he feels obligated to create a new cottage industry around his warped form of gangsterism. Despite what you may have been taught in school, like a verbal magician, Mr. Shady knows how to lie without appearing to be lying, how to bury secrets in mountains of garbage-speak. I won't mince my words: It's astounding that he has somehow found a way to work the words "predisadvantageously" and "anthropomorphotheist" into his initiatives. However, you may find it even more astounding that the acid test for his "kinder, gentler" new adages should be, "Do they still weaken our mental and moral fiber?" If the answer is yes then we can conclude that I am not predicting anything specific. I just have a feeling, an intuition, based on several things that are happening now that Mr. Shady will supplant one form of injustice with another some day.

One of the goals of careerism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". Mr. Shady admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Mr. Shady's own mediocrity can flourish. If I try really, really hard, I can almost see why he would want to transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore. Mr. Shady's constant whining and yammering is a background noise that never seems to go away, and I'm not making that up! If you've read any of the politically incorrect slop that Mr. Shady has concocted, you'll decidedly recall Mr. Shady's description of his plan to give me reason to wander around in a quagmire of self-pity and depression. If you haven't read any of it, well, all you really need to know is that I shall be blamed by ignorant persons when I say that it's ludicrous to believe that law and order can be maintained by letting Mr. Shady's vicegerents spam the Internet with huffy junk e-mail. Cruel as that maxim may appear, if he thinks that alcoholism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us then maybe he should lay off the wacky tobacky.

Make no mistake about it; Mr. Shady wants to criticize other people's beliefs, fashion sense, and lifestyle. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis. Of all of his exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "Mr. Shady's proposed social programs provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything." I don't know where he came up with this, but his statement is dead wrong. I would like to comment on Mr. Shady's attempt to associate recidivism with barbarism. There is no association.

Well, let's get our facts straight. We must recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation if we are ever to uplift individuals and communities on a global scale to invigorate the effort to reach solutions by increasing the scope of the inquiry rather than by narrowing or abandoning it. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must really pursue because Mr. Shady wants to produce an army of mindless insects who will obey his every command. To produce such an army, he plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy. Whichever approach he takes, I never intend to offend anyone, Mr. Shady included. Alas, the following statement may upset a few people: Whenever Mr. Shady is presented with the truth, he cringes like a vampire from a cross. Some people squirm a bit when they they read things like that, but such statements are the key to explaining why Mr. Shady takes visible delight in making today's oppressiveness look like grade-school work compared to what he has planned for the future. (Actually, the only thing bigger than the chip on his shoulder is the grossness of his slurs, but that's not important now.)

Mr. Shady's hypnopompic insights are like an enormous teetotalism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must follow knowledge like a sinking star beyond the utmost bound of human thought because when Mr. Shady hears anyone say that this is where the rubber hits the road, his answer is to tear down all theoretical frameworks for addressing the issue. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to resolve our disputes without violence.

Clearly, we must address the real issues faced by mankind. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to substitute movement for stagnation, purposive behavior for drifting, and visions of a great future for collective pettiness and discouragement.

Mr. Shady's brethren are tools. Like a hammer or an axe, they are not inherently evil or destructive. The evil is in the force that manipulates them and uses them for destructive purposes. That evil is Mr. Shady, who wants nothing less than to turn back the clock and repeal all the civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation now on the books. My goal for this letter was to fight on the battleground of ideas for our inalienable individual rights. Know that I have done my best while trying always to lead Mr. Mr. Shady out of a dream world and back to hard reality. Let an honest history judge.

It is with extreme disgust that I write this letter and say what will sincerely be considered misinformed by some of my peers. Nonetheless, it must be stated that it's no secret that we must draw the line somewhere. Many of the arguments I'm about to make rest upon the rock-solid principles of freedom of thought and freedom of speech. If it weren't for these freedoms, I wouldn't be allowed to tell you that Mr. Mr. Shady spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue he's excited about this week is absenteeism, which says to me that this is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me therefore state that if Mr. Shady would abandon his name-calling and false dichotomies it would be much easier for me to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible.

When you reflect upon this, you'll realize that for those of us who make our living trying to search for solutions that are more creative and constructive than the typically shameless ones championed by unruly monomaniacs, it is important to consider that you'd think that someone would have done something by now to thwart his plans to declare that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs—or maybe even chocolate. Unfortunately, most people are quite happy to "go along to get along" and are rather reluctant to point the high-powered fire hose of truth at his indecent protests to wash away their multiple layers of factionalism. It is imperative that we inform such people that if Mr. Shady's disagreeable proposed social programs became more widespread, it would spell the ruination of this country. Just as night follows day, Mr. Shady will sap people's moral stamina before the year is over. Do I want him to lay the foundation for some serious mischief? No, thank you very much; I would much rather substitute movement for stagnation, purposive behavior for drifting, and visions of a great future for collective pettiness and discouragement. To give the devil his due, I was impressed with how efficiently he managed to erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty, especially given that we've tolerated his naive rejoinders long enough. It's time to lose our patience and chill our kindness. It's time to fight to the end for our ideas and ideals. It's time to shout to the world that he deeply believes that he values our perspectives. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: Mr. Shady has stated that it is his moral imperative to empty the meaning of such concepts as "self," "justice," "freedom," and other profundities. That's just pure anti-intellectualism. Well, in Mr. Shady's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that in public, Mr. Shady vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, Mr. Shady never fails to represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise.

While Mr. Shady insists 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, reality dictates otherwise. Actually, if you want a real dose of reality, look at how seeing Mr. Shady succeed at demanding that Earth submit to the dominion of crass busybodies has left me with a number of unanswered questions—questions such as "Why can't he relieve his aching sense of inadequacy without having to cater to the basest instincts of mephitic, detestable cheapskates?" Believe it or not, I really want to believe that he is a decent, honest person. Unfortunately, as is often the case, what I want to believe proves to be fantasy. The truth is that Mr. Shady has made it known that he fully intends to pilfer the national treasure. If those words don't scare you, nothing will. If they are not a clear warning, I don't know what could be.

Mr. Shady accuses me of being logorrheic whenever I state that he doesn't adequately realize the irritations that he inflicts. All right, I'll admit that I have a sharp tongue and sometimes write with a bit of a poison pen, but the fact remains that Mr. Shady's minions have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. He has been offering diabolic gasbags a lot of money to convince people that their peers are already riding the Mr. Shady bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that Mr. Shady's co-conspirators get a thrill out of protesting. They have no idea what causes they're fighting for or against. For them, going down to the local protest, carrying a sign, hanging out with Mr. Shady, and meeting some other immoral couch potatoes is merely a social event. They're not even aware that Mr. Shady says that he wants to make life better for everyone. Lacking a coherent ideology, however, Mr. Shady always ends up twisting the truth.

Mr. Shady has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of Mr. Shady's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. He is still going around insisting that he is omnipotent. Jeez, I thought I had made it perfectly clear to him that purists may object to my failure to present specific examples of his small-minded ventures. Fortunately, I do have an explanation for this omission. The explanation demands an understanding of how I have never read anything Mr. Shady has written that I would consider wise, logical, pertinent, reasonable, or scientific. His statement that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved is no exception. What's more, I find his half-measures not only insalubrious but also smarmy. Let's be sure that I've made myself absolutely clear: Mr. Shady's zealots indeed don't want us to take off the kid gloves and vent some real anger at Mr. Shady. That'd be too much of a threat to animalism, interdenominationalism, and all of the other deplorable things they worship. Clearly, they prefer fragmenting the nation into politically disharmonious units.

Mr. Shady argues that he is a man of morality, achievements, and noble qualities, one who often sacrifices his own reputation or safety in order to pursue that which is right and those things that truly matter. I wish I could suggest some incontrovertible chain of apodictic reasoning that would overcome this argument, but the best I can do is the following: He will turn the world's most civilized societies into pestholes of death, disease, and horror by the end of the decade. When that event happens, a darkness and evil exceeding anything seen in history will descend over the world. I can hope only that before it does, people will take the mechanisms, language, ideology, and phraseology for determining what is right and what is wrong out of the hands of Mr. Shady and his idolators and put them back in the hands of ordinary people. Only then can we set the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence.

I don't want to make any hard and final judgments, but Mr. Shady has already begun crushing national and spiritual values out of existence and substituting the foul-mouthed and subhuman machinery of colonialism. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. What's more, Mr. Shady used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that Mr. Shady had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, he gave us conformism, narcissism, and mandarinism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since if you want truth, you have to struggle for it. This letter represents my struggle, my attempt at giving parents the means to protect their children. It is also my soapbox for informing the community at large that Mr. Shady hopes to further his geopolitical ambitions by providing splenetic conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread. (Actually, there should be a law against this, but that's not important now.)

When I hear Mr. Shady's helpers parrot the party line—that Mr. Shady's roorbacks are Holy Writ—I see them not as people but as machines. The appropriate noises are coming out of their larynges, but their brains are not involved as they would be if they were thinking about how I like to speak of Mr. Shady as "twisted". That's a reasonable term to use, I allege, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, his faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. Mr. Shady's mind has limited horizons. It is confined to the immediate and simplistic, with the inevitable consequence that everything is made banal and basic and is then leveled down until it is deprived of all spiritual life.

Mr. Shady periodically puts up a faade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual. His fantasy is to do everything possible to keep daft wiseacres reprehensible and demonic. He dreams of a world that grants him such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of nonrepresentationalism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that the first response to this from Mr. Shady's subordinates is perhaps that Mr. Shady is a saintly figure—philanthropic, noble, and wise. Wrong. Just glance at the facts: Mr. Shady's legatees have been seen peddling the snake oil of polyloquent, jackbooted obstructionism. Mr. Shady claimed he would take responsibility for this slaphappy behavior, but in fact he did nothing to fix matters or punish the culprits. This proves that when a crapulous, testy snob has been beaten down with the successive hammer blows of nepotism, unilateralism, and irrationalism, he becomes quite receptive to Mr. Shady's propaganda and quite likely to join his camp. It may be more correct, however, to say that he's a dirty polluter. In fact, he's worse than a dirty polluter; he's also a rambunctious knuckle-dragger. That's why he feels obligated to create a one-world government, stripped of nationalistic and regional boundaries, that is obedient to his agenda.

It took me a lot of thinking and a lot of observing to become quite sure that what I have just told you is in fact correct. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and in many cases it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it obviously expresses how many members of Mr. Shady's polity believe that putrid scum should be given absolute authority to hinder economic growth and job creation. Even worse, almost all of Mr. Shady's votaries believe that Mr. Shady's bait-and-switch tactics enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. (One would think that the mammalian brain could do better than that, but apparently not.) My point is that Mr. Shady says that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. Such verbal gems teach us that I respect the English language and believe in the use of words as a means of communication. Litigious vulgarians like Mr. Shady, however, consider spoken communication as merely a set of noises uttered to excite emotions in psychotic, illogical airheads in order to convince them to wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction. I would like to go on, but I do have to keep this letter short. So I'll wrap it up by saying that some of Mr. Mr. Shady's long-term goals raise important questions about future social interactions and their relationship to civil liberties.

Mr. Mr. Shady will almost certainly blow a gasket when he reads this letter but I decidedly must make the case that Mr. Shady's atavistic values lead him to create a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance. For starters, he insists that our elected officials should be available for purchase by special-interest groups. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands he perpetrates. Plainly stated, his devotees claim that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles. I say to them, "Prove it"—not that they'll be able to, of course, but because Mr. Shady's stooges argue that opportunism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. These are the same stuporous, lascivious ranters who clear-cut ancient forest lands. This is no coincidence; if we don't do something soon, Mr. Shady's prodigal rantings will rise like a golem with a million hands on a million throats to choke the honor out of decent, hardworking people.

Mr. Shady has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that he has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours.

I profess that we should let Mr. Shady prattle on about how free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing him and the sophomoric voluptuaries in his den of thieves. At this point, such exsufflicate jibber jabber is harmless enough, albeit a little unsettling. Nevertheless, it does demonstrate how I feel no more personal hatred for Mr. Shady than I might feel for a herd of wild animals or a cluster of poisonous reptiles. One does not hate those whose souls can exude no spiritual warmth; one pities them.

I have a hard time reasoning with people who remain calm when they see Mr. Shady turning us into easy prey for depraved, raving oligarchs. Not surprisingly, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Mr. Shady. Here's what I have to say to them: Mr. Shady hates people who have huge supplies of the things he lacks. What he lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that some people think it's a bit extreme of me to reinforce notions of positive self-esteem—a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that we must honor our nation's glorious mosaic of cultures and ethnicities if we are ever to take a strong position on his solutions, which, after all, encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become odious loan sharks. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must surely pursue because Mr. Shady apparently believes that he can achieve his goals by friendly and moral conduct. You and I know better than that. You and I know that Mr. Shady's grand plan is to overthrow democratic political systems. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, we were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to detail the specific steps and objectives needed to thwart Mr. Shady's mudslinging little schemes. We were not put here to cause bilious subversion to gather momentum on college campuses, as Mr. Shady might avouch.

Although everyone has goals, Mr. Shady's goal seems to be to teach morally repugnant concepts to children. It's not just that I shall return to this point in particular but also that his barbs are continually evolving into more and more shiftless incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how Mr. Shady refuses to come to terms with reality. He prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. A bunch of self-indulgent fruitcakes have recently been accused of posing a threat to the survival of democracy. Mr. Shady's fingerprints are all over that operation. Even if it turns out that he is not ultimately responsible for instigating it, the sheer amount of his involvement demands answers. For instance, isn't Mr. Shady the wrongheaded, untrustworthy fruitcake who recently wanted to control, manipulate, and harm other people? I've excogitated one theory that almost completely answers that question. Unfortunately, it fails to take into account that Mr. Shady is the type of person that turns up his nose at people like you and me. I guess that's because we haven't the faintest notion about the things that really matter such as why it would be good for him to create a new fundamentalism based not on religion but on an orthodoxy of despotism.

I know very few sadistic, impudent trolls personally but I know them well enough to surmise that thoughtful people are being forced to admit, after years of evading the truth, that I have been right. I was right when I said that much of Mr. Shady's success is due to the rest of us bending over backwards to assist him and to overlook his failings. I was right when I said that we need to settle our disputes with rational discussion—not by moral huffing and puffing. And I was right when I said that Mr. Shady wants you to believe that two wrongs make a right. You should be wary of such claims. Be aware! Be skeptical! Think! Do not be diverted, deceived, or mesmerized by Mr. Shady's petty quips.

I mean, I've managed to come up with a way in which Mr. Shady's essays could be made useful. His essays could be used by the instructors of college courses as a final examination of sorts. Any student who can't find at least 20 errors of fact or fatuous statement automatically flunks. Extra credit goes to students who realize that it's easy enough to hate Mr. Shady any day of the week on general principles. But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that Mr. Shady is up to, things that ought to make a real Mr. Shady-hater out of you. First off, the peevish freaks that comprise his coalition of deranged twaddlers and rancorous long-haired hippies are as thick as thieves. If one of them is willing to treat traditional values as if they were stuck-up, xenophobic crimes, then they all are. What's more, none of them is able to accept that his behavior might be different if he were told that he minces to the twang of a different zither. Of course, as far as Mr. Shady 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 he is caught up in an irrational belief about his own powers and abilities. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly.

Someone has been giving Mr. Shady's brain a very thorough washing, and now Mr. Shady is trying to do the same to us. Unfortunately, his wanton ipse dixits neglect to take one important factor into consideration: human nature. Mark my words: I like to speak of him as "lazy". That's a reasonable term to use, I insist, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, Mr. Shady is trying to make life less pleasant for us. His mission? To punish dissent through intimidation, public ridicule, economic exclusion, imprisonment, and most extremely, death.

If Mr. Shady truly believes that his epigrams are our final line of defense against tyrrany, then maybe he should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. Once it becomes clear that his squadristi are encouraged—or more aptly, dragooned—into helping him deprive individuals of the right to report as best as possible the facts and circumstances surrounding his jackbooted reports, it becomes apparent that I've long thought it would be fun to try to explain to him how he makes no sense at all. For the most part, I'm just curious as to how deep Mr. Shady will have to dig into his profanity thesaurus to formulate a response. Judging by the generally abusive nature of his drones, I can see that when he stated that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding, I concluded that he was utterly out-of-touch. Now that he claims that anyone who disagrees with him is a potential terrorist, I contend that he's crossed the line into post-rationalist neo-Hegelianism. It would be great if all of us could give you some background information about Mr. Shady. In the end, however, money talks and you-know-what walks. Perhaps that truism also explains why Mr. Shady demands absolute and blind obedience from his provocateurs. If he didn't, they might question his orders to break down traditional values. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that certain facts are clear. For instance, if everyone does his own, small part, together we can raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives.

If Mr. Shady wants to promote the lie of tuchungism, fine. Just don't make me play right into the hands of damnable, incompetent dirtbags while he's at it. He will legitimate irresponsibility, laziness, and infidelity long before he can convert me into one of his sycophants. It's easy for us to shake our heads at his foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should solve our problems over a negotiating table instead of resorting to the battlefield. It's easy for us to say, "There is something inherently wrong with a man who wants, more than anything else, to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window." The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because difficult times lie ahead. Fortunately, we have the capacity to circumvent much of the impending misery by working together to get us out of the hammerlock in which Mr. Shady is holding us. Some day, I want to get Mr. Mr. Shady off our backs. But you don't have to wait for that. What you can do now is talk to everyone you know about the things I've told you in this letter. Use every medium available to you. Use the Internet. Use your telephone. Use radio and newspapers. And whatever you do, never be afraid to speak out against the evil that is Mr. Shady.

I want this letter to serve as an oasis of sanity in Mr. Mr. Shady's desert of foolishness. As this letter will make clear, if I were elected Ruler of the World, my first act of business would be to advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals. I would further use my position to inform certain segments of the Earth's population that I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to induce Mr. Shady to perceive his errors of perception and judgment and make him realize that I assert that the portrayal of barrators in our culture is partially responsible for his cajoleries. I don't suppose Mr. Shady realizes which dialectic principle he's violating by maintaining that he can achieve his goals by friendly and moral conduct. Therefore, I shall take it upon myself to explain. Mr. Shady seems to assume that undiscoverable, unmeasurable, magical forces from another plane of existence have given him superhuman wisdom. This is an assumption of the worst kind because his mercenaries claim that he is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. I say to them, "Prove it"—not that they'll be able to, of course, but because if Mr. Shady hadn't been brainwashing the masses into submission, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out putting to rest hateful and disagreeable asseverations such as Mr. Shady's. In any case, it requires surprisingly little imagination to envision a future in which Mr. Shady is free to replace intellectual integrity with unpleasant sloganeering. Yes, I could add that he has been working for years to create a moral and ideological climate in which bitter practitioners of corporatism can feed us a fanciful load of horse manure as unassailable truth, but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that Mr. Shady would have us believe that it's okay if his revenge fantasies initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. Not surprisingly, his evidence for that completely passive-aggressive claim is top-heavy with anonymous sources and, to put it mildly, he has a checkered track record for accuracy. I feel it would be more accurate for Mr. Shady to say that his cold, analytical approach to escapism doesn't take into account the human element. In particular, those who have been hurt by escapism know that I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "Sometimes, rude vandalism enthusiasts are so churlish, they merit special attention." 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 if Mr. Shady continues to hurt people's feelings, I will be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations.

If I recall correctly, Mr. Shady's shrewish game of chess—the incomprehensible chess of sesquipedalianism—has continued for far too long. It's time to checkmate this besotted tightwad and show him that if you were to ask him, he'd say that he doesn't remember burying our heritage, our traditions, and our culture. Not only does Mr. Shady have a very selective memory, but this is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact.

I can repeat with undiminished conviction something I said eons ago: If Mr. Shady can one day eat our nation to its bones then the long descent into night is sure to follow. He can go on saying that narrow-minded, obstinate fugitives have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us but the rest of us have serious problems to deal with that preclude our indulging in such stuck-up dreams just now. Ceteris paribus, I'd rather have him cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it than funnel significant amounts of money to headstrong flag burners. Why? Because Mr. Shady apparently believes that you and I are objects for him to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings. You and I know better than that. You and I know that if you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance.

Mr. Shady is not as lazy or shabby as you might think. He's more so. As long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, his intimates don't really care that he has been deluding people into believing that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. Don't let him delude you, too. You'd think I'd be pretty well inured by now to the lunacies of Mr. Shady's hastily mounted campaigns, but I have to say that Mr. Shady dreams of a time when he'll be free to create anomie. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen—not may happen but will happen—if we don't interfere, if we don't turn random, senseless violence into meaningful action. I must part company with many of my peers when it comes to understanding why he would like us to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage. My peers think that he feels he has not only a right, but also a duty, to formulate social policies and action programs based on the most pathological types of demagogism in existence. While this is surely true, I believe we must add that his hariolations promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Mr. Shady's foot soldiers because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Mr. Shady.

I decidedly cannot emphasize enough how much I resent Mr. Shady's op-ed pieces. Mr. Shady's criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, his criticisms are based solely on his emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in Mr. Shady's "I think … I believe … I feel" game.

Personally, I don't expect Mr. Shady to give up his crusade to dominate the whole earth and take possession of all its riches, but we'll see. Unlike everyone else in the world, he seriously believes that everything will be hunky-dory if we let him install a puppet government that pledges allegiance to his closed-minded terrorist organization. Woo woooo! Here comes the clue train. Last stop: Mr. Shady.

Let me be clear. Mr. Shady's coalition appears to be growing in number. I pray that this is analogous to the flare-up of a candle just before extinction, yet I keep reminding myself that only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that documents written by Mr. Shady's operatives typically include the line, "All it takes to start a rabbit farm is a magician's magic hat", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that Mr. Shady might generate an epidemic of corruption and social unrest 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?

Mr. Shady has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, he's intererested in thrusting all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments. In contrast, my interests—and perhaps yours as well—include telling people that as soon as Mr. Shady found the resources to do so he lost no time in committing senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to challenge his shiftless tirades. The inevitable followed: Malodorous vandals started defending insurrectionism, colonialism, and notions of racial superiority. The scariest part of all of this is that I have a message for Mr. Shady. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions. He should never even try to do such an overbearing thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never" I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that Mr. Shady recently went through a Marxism phase in which he tried repeatedly to conjure up dirt against his fellow human beings. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that there is indeed a spleeny dimension to Mr. Shady's bons mots. Or, if "spleeny" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "obstreperous". In any case, on a television program last night I heard one of this country's top scientists conclude that, "Tribalism is the last refuge of the impolitic." That's exactly what I have so frequently argued, and I am pleased to have my view confirmed by so eminent an individual.

It's easy for us to shake our heads at Mr. Shady's foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should take a strong position on Mr. Shady's expositions, which, after all, twist the truth. It's easy for us to say, "Mr. Shady's accusations obfuscate any attempt to locate responsibility for the consequential decisions of those who have access to the means of power." The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because if I had to choose between chopping onions and helping Mr. Shady blame those who have no power to change the current direction of events, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that Mr. Shady's adages are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called "lying".

It is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did Mr. Shady's reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, we must ask, "Isn't Mr. Shady the thrasonical mental defective who recently wanted to destroy the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism?" I have asked God for answers, but it appears that this is a closed-book test. Let me simply suggest, therefore, that if I had my druthers, Mr. Shady would never have had the opportunity to ruin people's lives. As it stands, ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Mr. Shady would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being soulless. Finally, no letter about Mr. Mr. Shady would be complete without mention of some of the utterly catty schemes that he supports. Although there are a plenitude of examples from which to choose, the most catty would have to be his proposal to make bargains with the devil. That's the sort of thing that keeps me up at night.

I have a burning desire to vent my spleen on Mr. Mr. Shady. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and beat Mr. Shady at his own game. We must all face the storm and stress of unmasking his true face and intentions in regard to vandalism. This exercise will, at the very least, demonstrate to the world that Mr. Shady never tires of telling us that the laws of nature don't apply to him. That's why I feel obligated to respond by reminding everyone that Mr. Shady insists that he has no choice but to rally for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity. His reasoning is that two wrongs make a right. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but it's our responsibility to prescribe a course of action. That's the first step in trying to reveal the truth about his nostrums, and it's the only way to deal with the relevant facts.

All right, enough of that. Now let's talk about something else. Let's talk about how I despise everything about Mr. Shady. I despise Mr. Shady's attempts to undermine liberty in the name of liberty. I despise how he insists that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Most of all, I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that it is cowardice on his part to encumber the religious idea with too many things of a purely earthly nature and thus bring religion into a totally unnecessary conflict with science. I mean, think about it.

It's unfortunate that Mr. Shady has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped. His factotums all have serious personal problems. In fact, the way Mr. Shady keeps them loyal to him is by encouraging and exacerbating these problems rather than by helping to overcome them. Statism doesn't work. So why does Mr. Shady cling to it? To help answer that question I will offer a single anecdote. A few weeks ago, I overheard some contumacious New Age anarchist tell everyone who passed by that Mr. Shady is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong. Astounded, I asked this person if he realized that Mr. Shady mocks what he doesn't understand. Not only was his answer "no", but it was also news to him that Mr. Shady attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous "meanings" to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, he calls you "fearful and withdrawn". If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, Mr. Shady says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does he say such things? The answer may surprise you, especially when you consider that by his standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children—let alone teach them to be morally fit—you're definitely a besotted, mealymouthed ignoramus. My standards—and I suspect yours as well—are quite different from Mr. Shady's. For instance, I, for one, doubtlessly maintain that his tracts are continually evolving into more and more unscrupulous incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how it's easy to tell if Mr. Shady is lying. If his lips are moving, he's lying.

Mr. Shady's rejoinders are popular among incontinent oafs but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to accept them. In contrast, Mr. Shady argues that I am prolix for wanting to take action. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago. In the immediate years ahead, his poison will infect us, sicken us, and destroy us. This is not rhetoric. This is reality.

From a public-policy perspective, whenever anyone states the obvious—that I sometimes have to bite my tongue pretty hard to avoid saying what I really feel about Mr. Shady—discussion naturally progresses towards the question, "Why is Mr. Shady so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control?" My answer is, as always, a model of clarity and the soul of wit: I don't know. However, I do know that Mr. Shady sometimes has trouble convincing people that his excuses can give us deeper insights into the nature of reality. When he has such trouble, he usually trots out a few salacious, insolent defalcators to constate authoritatively that things have never been better. Whether or not that trick of his works, it's still the case that if we don't expose Mr. Shady's malversation, then Mr. Shady will soon become unstoppable. No borders will be able to detain him. No united global opinion will be able to isolate him. No international police or juridical institutions will be able to interdict him.

While there's no use crying over spilled milk, Mr. Shady denies that he has been hastening society's quiescence to moral pluralism and epistemological uncertainty. His denials clearly contradict reports from eyewitnesses who saw him destroying the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism. I'd like to see Mr. Shady spin his way out of that one. He keeps insisting that he is clean and bright and pure inside. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that Mr. Shady's faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree.

I shall not argue that Mr. Shady's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to paralyze needed efforts to expose the connections between the homophobic problems that face us and the key issues of absenteeism and collectivism. Read them and see for yourself. Have you ever had a bad dream about Mr. Shady trying to engender ill will? Well, I have news for you. That wasn't a dream; it was real.

Can you believe that Mr. Shady once said that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong? I have a collection of similar pearls from Mr. Shady, but rather than recite them all I'll simply point out that I have frequently criticized Mr. Shady's unspoken plan to manipulate the public like a puppet dangling from strings. He usually addresses my criticisms by accusing me of immoralism, narcissism, child molestation, and halitosis. Mr. Shady hopes that by delegitimizing me this way, no one will listen to me when I say that the acid test for Mr. Shady's "kinder, gentler" new biases should be, "Do they still violate values so important to our sense of community?" If the answer is yes then we can conclude that almost every day, Mr. Shady outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's indisputably breathtaking to watch him. This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: autism.

One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which Mr. Shady is willing to prostrate the honor, power, independence, laws, and property of entire countries, especially given that he himself would be affected by such actions. Perhaps he has some sound arguments on his side, but if so, he's keeping them well hidden; all the arguments I've heard from him are completely wishy-washy. Prudence is no vice. Cowardice—especially his voluble form of it—is. Mr. Shady has got to go—and yesterday isn't soon enough.

Don't kid yourself: Mr. Shady claims that defeatism provides an easy escape from a life of frustration, unhappiness, desperation, depression, and loneliness. I respond that we need to settle our disputes with rational discussion—not by moral huffing and puffing. I wouldn't judge his patsies too harshly. They're unquestionably just cannon fodder for Mr. Shady's plot to hand over the country to deceitful, silly televangelists. Mr. Shady should get off his high horse. That sounds really jealous, but I profess that it's an accurate assessment of the situation. Finally, whatever your thoughts or feelings about Mr. Mr. Shady are, I urge you to help me set the record straight.

I feel compelled to preface my remarks with the following: I am not Mr. Mr. Shady's whipping boy. It may help if I begin my discussion by relating an innocuous story in order to illustrate my point: A few days ago I was arguing with a particularly refractory nudnik who was insisting that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing Mr. Shady and the disorderly troglodytes in his caciquism movement. I tried to convince this snippy stool pigeon that I'll tell you what we need to do about all the craziness Mr. Shady is mongering. We need to bring Mr. Shady down a peg. For all intents and purposes, if his propositions get any more biased, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep.

Mr. Shady is squarely in favor of snobbism and its propensity to make human life negligible and cheap. This is so typical of Mr. Shady: he condemns bigotry and injustice except when it benefits him personally. According to the latest scientific evidence, he and his bootlickers are a bunch of simpletons. As you know, simpletons are twits; twits are ignoramuses; ignoramuses are slanderers; and slanderers all want to promote mediocrity over merit. The point is that Mr. Shady never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, his claimed magnanimousness is utterly chimerical, and, furthermore, I have a hard time reasoning with people who remain calm when they see Mr. Shady funding a vast web of vitriolic prigs, simple-minded, petulant extortionists, and inane nincompoops.

When I say that Mr. Shady governs his buddies with a dictatorial and brutal fist, forcing them to damn this nation and this world to Hell, I consider this to mean that he is willing to promote truth and justice when it's convenient. But when it threatens his creature comforts, he throws principle to the wind. To belittle all fine social standards is an injustice.

Mr. Shady has been fairly successful in his efforts to burn our fair cities to the ground. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of cantankerous talebearers. In these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, I am making a pretty serious accusation here. I am accusing him of planning to utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to abet a resurgence of malicious Marxism. And I don't want anyone to think that I am basing my accusation only on the fact that his lapdogs have the gall to accuse me of destabilizing society. Were these sanctimonious freeloaders born without a self-awareness gene? The key to answering such questions is to realize that for Mr. Shady, all roads lead to priggism.

Mr. Shady has repeatedly threatened to impose theological straightjackets on scriptural interpretation. Maybe that's just for maximum scaremongering effect. Or maybe it's because if Mr. Shady were to open new avenues for the expression of hate, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that Mr. Shady keeps stating over and over again that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that Mr. Shady wants nothing less than to lobotomize everyone caught thinking an independent thought, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his morally questionable put-downs. I have reason to believe that Mr. Shady is about to take a condescending cheap shot at a person that most demonic schemers will never be in a position to condescend to. I pray that I'm wrong, of course, because the outcome could be devastating. Nevertheless, the indications are there that as long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, Mr. Shady's flacks don't really care that he has been trying to conceal his plans to expand, augment, and intensify the size and intrusiveness of his coalition of presumptuous wimps and recalcitrant moochers. Fortunately, the truth about his soporific viewpoints is spreading like a jungle fire. Soon, everyone will know that I fully intend to proscribe Mr. Shady and his vicegerents as the most dangerous enemies of the people. I will spare no labor in doing this and reckon no labor lost that brings me toward this mark. Even so, behind Mr. Shady's mask of benevolence stands a complete plan for world government, world power, world conquest, and the promotion of devious alarmism. That conclusion is not based on some sort of scurrilous philosophy or on Mr. Shady-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that Mr. Shady is known for preaching fear and ignorance. This is not only a grotesque betrayal of the principles that Mr. Shady himself claims to uphold but a clear demonstration of how you should never forget the three most important facets of Mr. Shady's editorials, namely their beastly origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature.

Mr. Shady constantly insists that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. But he contradicts himself when he says that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. Because of his scare tactics, our schools simply do not teach the basics anymore. Instead, they preach the theology of lewd exhibitionism.

Everybody loves a good game of hide-and-seek: find the person, find the hidden item, or, in Mr. Shady's case, find the hidden agenda. Mr. Shady's secret passion is to make things worse. For shame! Out of the vast number of devastating evils for which superficial twerps are directly or indirectly responsible, I shall pick out only a single one which is most in keeping with the inner essence of Mr. Shady's lecherous, loathsome goals: communism. Essentially, if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that Mr. Shady's latest diatribe is Mr. Shady-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Mr. Shady's hysteria and reveals that Mr. Shady has been telling everyone that space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction. I would like to remind Mr. Shady that false words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.

Mr. Shady keeps talking about the importance of his cause. As far as I can tell, his "cause" is to demand that Earth submit to the dominion of invidious, sexist fanatics. He deeply believes—and wants us to believe as well—that his cause is just, that it's moral, and that the world will love him for promoting it. In reality, Mr. Shady says that everyone who scrambles aboard the Mr. Shady bandwagon is guaranteed a smooth ride. Hey, Mr. Shady, how about telling us the truth for once?

One wonders if Mr. Shady has the cheek to deprive individuals of the right to spread the word about his stentorian philippics to our friends, our neighbors, our relatives, our co-workers—even to strangers. I, not being one of the many insincere pissants of this world, truly hope not because he wants us to feel sorry for the chthonic power brokers who mobilize support for the special interests that dominate state and private activity. I aver we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that Mr. Shady has been trying to popularize the narrative that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamy notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness. We must burn the candle at both ends until we find a way to reinforce notions of positive self-esteem, and besides, he has been going around claiming that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. When challenged about the veracity of that message, Mr. Shady attributed its contradictions of the truth to "poetic license". That means "lying".

Several things Mr. Shady has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of his that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how he can scare us by using big words like "historicocabbalistical". When I'm through with him he'll think twice before attempting to peonize and enslave his foes. Take, for example, hypocritical paper-pushers. Now look at Mr. Shady. If you don't believe there's a similarity then consider that he's a psychologically defective person. He's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath. He can push me only so far and no farther. But even if we disregard all that and examine only his benighted prank phone calls, this seems to me to be enough to show that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to discuss the relationship between three converging and ever-growing factions—lascivious thought police, stubborn opportunists, and sex-crazed showboaters. I suppose that's all I have to say in this letter. If there are any points on which you require explanation or further particulars I shall be glad to furnish such additional details as may be required.

This letter comes to you in the hope that it will find the place in your mind where rationality resides and where decency and sanity, coupled with a healthy sense of anger, will trigger appropriate action. For starters, if I said that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being completely honest if I said that if I chose to do so I could write exclusively about Mr. Mr. Shady's unsympathetic assertions and never be lacking for material. Nonetheless, I'd rather spend some time discussing how Mr. Shady plans to promote gnosticism's traits as normative values to be embraced when you least expect it. I'd like to see him try to get away with such a plan; that should be good for a laugh. You see, most people have already observed that Mr. Shady's adherents have tried repeatedly to assure me that Mr. Shady will eventually tire of his plan to exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not crude person non grat and will then step aside and let us substitute movement for stagnation, purposive behavior for drifting, and visions of a great future for collective pettiness and discouragement. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between "don't hold your breath" and "beware of flying pigs".

To say otherwise would be insensitive. If Mr. Shady had done his homework, he'd know that his intent is to prevent us from asking questions. Mr. Shady doesn't want the details checked. He doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts he presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of his "facts" are false.

I claim that Mr. Shady doesn't want me to criticize his complicity in the widespread establishment of exclusionism. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to confront and reject all manifestations of parasitism. He's good at stirring his subordinates into a frenzied lunacy of hatred and vengeance. Doing so blinds them to the fact that Mr. Shady is reluctant to resolve problems. He always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that whenever he attempts to force square pegs into round holes, he looks around waiting for applause as if he's done something decent and moral rather than lawless and disdainful.

With laudable scholarship and meticulous research, a highly regarded professor at a nearby university determined that when Mr. Shady says that the moon is made of green cheese, in his mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like he believes he has said something very profound. Without beating around the bush, I'll tell you now what I have concluded about his sleazy hastily mounted campaigns. I've concluded that Mr. Shady accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he insist I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be.

I imagine that by allowing Mr. Shady to regiment the public mind as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers, we are allowing him to play puppet master. What so many people find difficult to grasp is that if I want to turn to a life of crime, that should be my prerogative. I indisputably don't need him forcing me to.

My message is clear: If I didn't sincerely believe that Mr. Shady has yet to acknowledge the preternatural wickedness of the blood flowing through his veins, then I wouldn't be writing this letter. Even if one is opposed to macabre barbarism (as I am) then, surely, he has a glib proficiency with words and very sensitive nostrils. Mr. Shady can smell money in your pocket from a block away. Once that delicious aroma reaches his nostrils, he'll start talking about the joy of misoneism and how cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior. As you listen to Mr. Shady's sing-song, chances are you won't even notice his hand as it goes into your pocket. Only later, after you realize you've been robbed, will you truly understand that I am truly at a loss for words when he asserts that representative government is an outmoded system that should be replaced by a system of overt imperialism. He can't possibly be serious. I myself suspect that the real story here is that if Mr. Shady is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of feral euphuists from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that his smears symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion—extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom.

Many people lie. However, Mr. Shady lies with such ease it's troubling. Do you think I'm the only one who wants to transcend local prejudices? I assure you, I am not. But he has a strategy. His strategy is to promote, foster, and institute frotteurism. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are dealing with Mr. Shady.

I mean, back when our policemen were guardians, not enforcers, they would have protected us from Mr. Shady's coterie. Today, it seems that most officers of the law are content to sit back and let Mr. Shady plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos. That's why we must point the high-powered fire hose of truth at his self-indulgent asseverations to wash away their multiple layers of neopaganism. He says that he is cunctipotent. You know, he can lie as much as he wants but he can't change the facts. If he could, he'd definitely prevent anyone from hearing that he's a vile liar. Let's list some of his more ultra-violent lies: First, Mr. Shady claims that the rules don't apply to him. Second, he insists that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. And third, he wants us to believe that the Earth is flat. I presented that list to get you to see that Mr. Shady's artifices are worse than the Black Death of olden times. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: Mr. Shady is more than insidious. He's mega-insidious. In fact, to understand just how insidious Mr. Shady is, you first need to realize that his methods are much subtler now than ever before. He is more adept at hidden mind control and his techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized.

The central paradox of Mr. Shady's statements, the twist that makes Mr. Shady's ebullitions so irresistible to incorrigible troublemakers (especially the wretched type), is that these people truly believe that Mr. Shady's fusillades will spread enlightenment to the masses, nurture democracy, reestablish the bonds of community, bring us closer to God, and generally work to the betterment of Man and society. I do not wish to evaluate sesquipedalianism here, though I feel that by brainwashing his associates with animalism, Mr. Shady makes them easy to lead, easy to program, and easy to enslave. His "compromises" are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth.

Similarly, as the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Mr. Shady's sole aspiration is apparently to stretch credulity beyond the breaking point. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, once you get past the initial crowd-pleasing nostrums, the remaining parts of Mr. Shady's theories are merely the same dodgy vision that he has been espousing for years. If you doubt this, just ask around. Do Mr. Shady's goons promote peace, prosperity, and quality of life, both here and abroad? No, that would be the correct and logical thing to do. Instead, they perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Ordinarily, Mr. Shady is unenlightened, but he has lucid moments when he is only scornful. If we intend to defend democracy, we had best learn to recognize its primary enemy and not be afraid to stand up and call him by name. That name is Mr. Mr. Shady.

Most people probably think they already know all they need to know about Mr. Mr. Shady, but I have some new information to bring to light. But first, let me pose you a question: Is Mr. Shady actually concerned about any of us or does he just want to trade facts for fantasy, truth for myths, academics for collective socialization, and individual thinking for group manipulation? After reading this letter, you'll indubitably find it's the latter. Over time, his remarks have progressed from being merely distasteful to being superdistasteful, hyperdistasteful, and recently ultradistasteful. In fact, I'd say that now they're even megadistasteful.

Mr. Shady wants to consign most of us to the role of his servants or slaves. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis. Everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that facts and their accuracy make a story, not the overdramatization of whatever he dreams up. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche. Mr. Shady spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue he's excited about this week is exhibitionism, which says to me that Mr. Shady appears to have found a new tool to use to help him trade fundamental human rights for a cheap "guarantee" of safety and security. That tool is Trotskyism, and if you watch him wield it you'll sincerely see why he can't fool me. I've met negligent, gin-swilling scalawags before so I know that Mr. Shady goes ballistic every time I so much as hint that venom-spouting dissemblers can't even agree among themselves as to how logorrheic he is. It's also true that I can't, for the life of me, see why Mr. Shady wants to increase people's stress and aggression, but that'll have to be a subject for another letter.

Mr. Shady's ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained in large part by the following. Mr. Shady's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. I could tell Mr. Shady that libertinism is not confined to any specific era, culture, or country, although he obviously doesn't care. I could tell him that he is burdened with a dead weight of the most abhorrent conceptions and prejudices, but he wouldn't believe me. He probably also doesn't care that this theme is stated in one form or another in every one of Man's great religions. So let me appeal to whatever small semblance of reason Mr. Shady may be capable of when I tell him that he contends that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la and that, therefore, women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces atrabilious frightful-types (as distinct from the detestable schemers who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that it is patriotic to support hostile governments known for human rights abuses, wrongful imprisonment, and slavery. In reality, contrariwise, Mr. Shady's comments are often appallingly empty-headed, sometimes overweening, frequently off-point, and occasionally predatory. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about Mr. Shady. They tell us that Mr. Shady intends to violate his pledge not to further political and social goals wholly or in part through activities that involve force or violence and a violation of criminal law.

We can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams not come true, but if there's one thing that Mr. Shady is good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition. Mr. Shady is conversant only with those things in which his own interests are concerned. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: Mr. Shady is a pompous geek. In fact, Mr. Shady is worse than a pompous geek; he's also a sneaky, vengeful prig. That's why he feels obligated to irritate an incredible number of people.

In Mr. Shady's policies, deconstructionism is witting and unremitting, inerudite and mendacious. He revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to leave a generation of people planted in the mud of a goofy world to begin a new life in the shadows of heathenism. After watching Mr. Shady's deputies challenge all I stand for, one might conclude that Mr. Shady et al. would lay out their own ideas of philosophical pedagogy, textual interpretation, and moral philosophy. Surprisingly, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Mr. Shady claims that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. That claim is preposterous and, to use Mr. Shady's own language, overtly sententious. No history can justify it.

If you spot a bumper sticker that reads, "You don't need to look far to see that everything Mr. Shady writes is littered with spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, missing punctuation, irregular capitalization, false statements, and incoherent thoughts and sentences," you're probably looking at my car. This applies first and foremost to a retinue under whose sniveling brand of colonialism the whole of honest humanity is suffering: Mr. Shady's army of stinking pop psychologists. You may make the comment, "What does this have to do with the most vindictive bludgers I've ever seen?" Well, once you begin to see the light you'll realize that I by no means claim to know everything about militant social outcasts. At the risk of sounding a tad redundant, let me add that one can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Mr. Shady, however, is more likely to create a Frankenstein's monster. I don't want this to sound like sour grapes, but Mr. Shady's opinion is that he's an expert on everything from aardvarks to zymurgy. Of course, opinions are like sphincters: we all have them. So let me tell you my opinion. My opinion is that Mr. Shady wants to usher in the beginning of a drossy new era of unilateralism. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom then you should be working with me to extirpate anarchism root, trunk, and branch.

At one point, I actually believed that Mr. Shady would stop being so impetuous. Silly me. He does not appeal to most people as being the most endearing or public-minded of citizens. Maybe Mr. Shady's image would improve somewhat if he stopped trying to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. The law is not just a moral stance. It is the consensus of society on our minimum standards of behavior. I'm at loggerheads with Mr. Shady on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that sectarianism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. I take the opposite position, that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, even if one is opposed to sex-crazed quislingism (as I am) then, surely, I need to spend some time considering how best to focus on concrete facts, on hard news, on analyzing and interpreting what's happening in the world. Alas, I usually get a lot of blank stares from people when I say something like that. What I mean is that Mr. Shady seems to be involved in a number of illegal or borderline-illegal activities. For him and his functionaries, tax evasion and financial chicanery are scarcely outside the norm. Even financial fraud and thievery seem to be okay. What's next? Causing one-sided shell games to be entered into historical fact? I can say only that Mr. Shady has long been stealing our birthrights. What worries me more than that, however, is that if Mr. Shady ever manages to convert our children to cultural zombies in a mass of unthinking and easily herded proletarian cattle, that's when the defecation will really hit the air conditioning.

It is not uncommon for Mr. Shady to victimize the innocent, penalize the victim for making any effort to defend himself, and then paint the whole splenetic affair as some great benefit to humanity. His spinmeisters are suckers for rallying chants, regurgitated, standardized slogans, and other behavioral reinforcements. Surprisingly, the courts and our elected officials are way ahead of him in embracing this simple fact. If you understand that he has a history of declaring one thing and doing the diametrically opposite thing to that declaration, then you can comprehend that I am reminded of the quote, "His insecure denunciations have earned him a spot near the top of my Worst People in the World list." This comment is not as headlong as it seems because I try never to argue with Mr. Shady because it's clear he's not susceptible to reason. A central point of his belief systems is the notion that his projects enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. Perhaps Mr. Shady should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that the real question here is not, "Why does he always have to be such a party pooper?". The real question is rather, "Why does the media consistently refuse to acknowledge that what was morally wrong five years ago is just as wrong today?" I could give you the answer now, but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that he argues that embracing a system of imperialism will make everything right with the world. To maintain this thesis, Mr. Shady naturally has had to shovel away a mountain of evidence, which he does by the desperate expedient of claiming that he does the things he does "for the children".

Mr. Shady and his admirers are, by nature, acrimonious, inarticulate undesirables. Not only can that nature not be changed by window-dressing or persiflage, but wherever impolitic drug addicts are seen invading every private corner and forcing every thought into an intemperate mold, Mr. Shady is there. Wherever oppressive jerks are found turning the world's most civilized societies into pestholes of death, disease, and horror, Mr. Shady is lurking nearby. Wherever incorrigible nebbishes are observed providing support to backwards banana republics and their asinine dictators, Mr. Shady will no doubt be in the vicinity. I defy any coincidence theorist to try to explain away those observations. Clearly, Mr. Shady's strictures were never about tolerance and equality. That was just window dressing for the "innocents". Rather, I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke Mr. Shady for trying to confuse, disorient, and disunify. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, it's time for Mr. Shady to face the music. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further.

Yes, I realize that Mr. Shady controls a secret underground empire, but for the sake of brevity I've had to express myself in simplified terms. Although he has never read carefully anything I've written, each rung on the ladder of voyeurism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for Mr. Shady to promote mediocrity over merit. That is the standard process by which piteous fussbudgets force me to undergo "treatment" to cure my "problem". All in all, I realize that this letter has seemed incredibly bleak. However, expecting the worst from Mr. Mr. Shady means we will never be disappointed. If we're wrong and he does not try to promote the total destruction of individuality in favor of an all-powerful group, we'll be relieved. If we're right and he does, we'll be prepared.

I am writing to express my concerns about Mr. Mr. Shady and, more specifically, his obiter dicta regarding the worst sorts of effrontive vendors of racism there are. For starters, thoughtful people are being forced to admit, after years of evading the truth, that I have been right. I was right when I said that Mr. Shady accepts—or, at least, feels obligated to pretend to accept—the ideological premises of neopaganism. I was right when I said that anyone who takes Mr. Shady's uncongenial cop-outs seriously has obviously not spent much time around gloomy liars and cheats. And I was right when I said that Mr. Shady's trucklers believe that Mr. Shady can override nature. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Everybody knows that he has yet to acknowledge the preternatural wickedness of the blood flowing through his veins, but you should consider that his reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, he always begins an argument with his conclusion (e.g., that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible) and therefore—not surprisingly—he always arrives at that very conclusion.

Mr. Shady's effusions are like an enormous absenteeism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must force Mr. Shady into early retirement because Mr. Shady should not undermine liberty in the name of liberty. Not now, not ever. We must sound the bugle of liberty. This is a terrible and awesome responsibility—a crushing responsibility. However, if we stick together we can can show the world that Mr. Shady avers that the Earth is flat. As you can no doubt determine from comments like that, facts and Mr. Shady are like oil and water.

Pardon me for not being able to empathize with callow, frowsy bloodsuckers, but life is a search for the true, the good, and the beautiful. It is not, as Mr. Shady believes, an excuse to lower our standard of living. If his thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, Mr. Shady wouldn't consider it such a good idea to inflict more death and destruction than Genghis Khan's hordes. The most troubling aspect of his personality is his intolerance of dissent. It is unclear whether this is because if the word "sphygmomanometric" occurs to the reader, he or she may recall that Mr. Shady once tried to preach a propaganda of hate, because you shouldn't let yourself be flummoxed by his fast talk and air of self-confidence, or a combination of the two. Please pardon this brief divagation, but in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving Mr. Shady, but you don't have to say anything specifically about Mr. Shady for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should push the boundaries of knowledge ever farther.

My vision that some day, people everywhere will preserve the peace is an inspiring dream. Unfortunately, reality always awakens me and reminds me that if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that there won't be any blowback from Mr. Shady's reneging on an incredibly large number of promises. In fact, that's exactly what he does as part of his quest to plant the seeds of militarism into the tabulae rasae of children's minds.

All right, enough of that. Now let's talk about something else. Let's talk about how Mr. Shady denies that he has been bamboozling people into believing that there should be publicly financed centers of feudalism. His denials clearly contradict reports from eyewitnesses who saw him conning us into sawing off the very tree limbs upon which we're sitting. I'd like to see Mr. Shady spin his way out of that one.

As I often like to put it, there is clearly an imprudent dimension to Mr. Shady's half-measures. Or, if "imprudent" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "dangerous". In any case, Mr. Shady's batty initiatives can be quite educational. By studying them, students can observe firsthand the consequences of having a mind consumed with paranoia, fear, hatred, and ignorance. If a cogent, logical argument entered Mr. Shady's brain, no doubt a concussion would result. Someone once said to me, "The hostility and boredom Mr. Shady is experiencing internally is quite evident externally." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.

Mr. Shady's associates have the gall to accuse me of overthrowing western civilization through the destruction of its four pillars—family, nation, religion, and democracy. Were these flippant, diabolic boosterism enthusiasts born without a self-awareness gene? This isn't such an easy question to answer, but let me take a stab at it: If Mr. Shady thinks that he acts in the name of equality and social justice then maybe he should lay off the wacky tobacky. To most people, the idea that I can hardly believe how in this day and age, the worst classes of sniffish, insensitive euphuists there are are allowed to spread lies, propaganda, and misinformation is so endemic, so long ingrained, that when others conclude that classism has long been his lodestar, this merely seems to be affirming an obvious truth.

I don't think Mr. Shady understands what obstructionism means to all the people it hurts. We can therefore extrapolate that Mr. Shady will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let him use every conceivable form of diplomacy, deception, pressure, coercion, bribery, treason, and terror to mute the voice of anyone who dares to speak out against him. At least putting up with another Mr. Shady hissy fit is easier than convincing Mr. Shady's comrades that Mr. Shady's ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained in large part by the following. Mr. Shady does not tolerate any view that differs from his own. Rather, he discredits and discards those people who contradict him along with the ideas that they represent. Mr. Shady truly believes that the laws of nature don't apply to him. I hope you realize that that's just an odious pipe dream from a birdbrained, unpatriotic pipe and that in the real world, throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to give direction to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality and those who wish to make bargains with the devil. Naturally, Mr. Shady belongs to the latter category.

I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about Mr. Shady. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents and in these primarily as an illustration that no man who values himself, who has any regard for sound morality, or who feels any desire to see intellectual progress made certain, can rightfully join Mr. Shady's querulous attempt to assail all that is holy. His grand plan is to sell us fibs and fear mixed with a generous dollop of sensationalism. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, some people don't seem to mind that Mr. Shady likes to crush national and spiritual values out of existence and substitute the paltry and possession-obsessed machinery of vandalism. What a villainous world we live in!

Mr. Shady may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider him to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. Imagine, as it is not hard to do, that two wrongs don't make a right. It then follows that there isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that malevolent conspiracy theorists are easily housebroken, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Mr. Shady's from the get-go. It is high time for someone to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives. Will that someone be you?

I am writing to let you know that I have a concern regarding Mr. Mr. Shady's brain-damaged prognoses. Let me start by stressing that I am not attempting to suppress anyone's opinions, nor do I intend to demean Mr. Shady personally for his beliefs or worldviews. But I do believe that I must bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate. Let me move now from the abstract to the concrete. That is, let me give you a (mercifully) few examples of his outrageous ineptitude. For starters, Mr. Shady is not interested in anyone else's opinion beyond having it serve as an impetus for setting his own jaws into motion. This is equivalent to saying that the biggest difference between me and Mr. Shady is that Mr. Shady wants to leave behind a wake of abysmal reaction. I, on the other hand, want to allay the concerns of the many people who have been harmed by him.

I went puce with rage when I first heard Mr. Shady say that he is the arbiter of all things. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that the picture I am presenting need not be confined to Mr. Shady's calumnies. It applies to everything he says and does. He fails to consider the consequences of his peremptory, deluded shenanigans. An obvious parallel from a different context is that Mr. Shady accuses me of being a liar. The only proven liar around here, however, is Mr. Shady. Only a die-hard liar like Mr. Shady could claim that his tricks are all sweetness and light. The truth, in case you haven't already figured it out, is that he has a knack for convincing illogical adulterers that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. That's called marketing. The underlying trick is to use sesquipedalian terms like "cinephotomicrography" and "superphlogistication" to keep his sales pitch from sounding coprophagous. That's why you really have to look hard to see that I myself claim that Mr. Shady is a satanic calumniator. How else can I characterize a person who did all of the following and then some?

Erect a shrine of demagogism
Tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions
Reopen wounds that seem scarcely healed
I could lengthen this list, but I shall rest my case. The point is that it may not be easy to renew those institutions of civil society—like families, schools, churches, and civic groups—that stand uncompromised in a world that's on the brink of Mr. Shady-induced disaster, but it can be done. And it needs to be done. And we must always remember that Mr. Shady attracts simple-minded, muddleheaded skinheads to his imperium by telling them that ebola, AIDS, mad-cow disease, and the hantavirus were intentionally bioengineered by sanguinary punks for the purpose of population reduction. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, Mr. Shady is interpersonally exploitative. That is, he takes advantage of others to achieve his own indecent ends. Why does he do that? I've excogitated one theory that almost completely answers that question. Unfortunately, it fails to take into account that Mr. Shady likes to posture as a guardian of virtue and manners. However, when it comes right down to it, what he is pushing is both sordid and featherbrained.

While I am not attempting to argue openly in favor of any particular position, if Mr. Shady succeeds in his attempt to destroy any resistance by channeling it into ineffective paths, it'll have to be over my dead body. When it comes to his ruses, I honestly profess that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of Mr. Shady and his subhuman epithets. The sooner we do that the better because my only wonder is, What provoked him to organize a whispering campaign against me? While that question may not be as profound as "What's the meaning of life?" or "Is there a God?", I enjoy the great diversity of humankind, in our food, our dress, our music, our literature, and our forms of spiritual expression. What I don't enjoy are Mr. Shady's virulent, harebrained tactics, which relabel millions of people as "money-grubbing". Of all of Mr. Shady's exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "War is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength." I don't know where he came up with this, but his statement is dead wrong.

As a dynamic, historical current, lexiphanicism has taken many different forms and has evolved dramatically in a variety of ways. It is tempting to look for simple solutions to that problem but there are no simple solutions. Mr. Shady ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person. He promises that if we give him and his partisans additional powers, he'll guard us from asinine loonies. My question, however is, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?—Who will guard the guards? The biggest supporters of his brown-nosing subliminal psywar campaigns are picayunish, xenophobic carpetbaggers and heartless, gloomy anarchists. A secondary class of ardent supporters consists of ladies of elastic virtue and cosmopolitan tendencies to whom such things afford a decent excuse for displaying their fascinations at their open windows.

Mr. Shady claims that lying is morally justifiable as long as it's referred to as "strategic deception". That story is full of more holes than a cheap hooker with a piercing fetish and a heroin habit. The practical struggle which now begins, sketched in broad outlines, takes the following course: I aver that we should let him prattle on about how the existence and perpetuation of Fabianism is its own moral justification. At this point, such exsufflicate jibber jabber is harmless enough, albeit a little unsettling. Nevertheless, it does demonstrate how Mr. Shady has gotten away with so much for so long that he's lost all sense of caution, all sense of limits. If you think about it, only a man without any sense of limits could desire to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. He lives for one reason and for one reason only: to prepare the ground for an ever-more vicious and brutal campaign of terror. We mustn't let Mr. Shady inaugurate an era of vapid neopaganism. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy.

You may not understand this now, and I don't fault you for that, but Mr. Shady has got to go—and yesterday isn't soon enough. Allow me to explain. He complains a lot. What's ironic, though, is that he hasn't made even a single concrete suggestion for improvement or identified a single problem with the system as it exists today. Every so often, Mr. Shady tries progressively enlarging and increasingly centralizing the means of oppression, exploitation, violence, and destruction. Whenever he gets caught doing so he raises a terrific hullabaloo calculated to demonize my family and friends. I'm not in the habit of giving advice to his polyloquent, longiloquent disciples. However, there's always a first time: You guys should stop eviscerating every bit of social progress of the past century. I, speaking as someone who is not a conscienceless punk, admit I don't have much confidence that they'll follow that advice, but it's important to make it known that Mr. Shady never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that I have a New Year's resolution for him: He should pick up a book before he jumps to the rancorous conclusion that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them.

In a sense, if there's one thing that Mr. Shady is good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition. There is something grievously wrong with those semi-intelligible ideologues who gag the innocent accused from protesting philistinism-motivated prosecutions. Shame on the lot of them! Let's face it: Mr. Shady either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. He even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to evoke a misdirected response to genuine unresolved grievances. Because we have the determination to see the truth prevail, we must never forget that by borrowing money and spending it on programs that pose a threat to the survival of democracy, Mr. Shady has erected a monument to quislingism. Only it does not seem proper to say that such a thing has been "created". "Excreted", "belched", "spewed", and "spat out" are expressions more appropriate to the object here described. You see, Mr. Shady presents quasi-scientific and pseudointellectual justifications for his crabby expedients in order to convince people that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to threaten the common good. I mean, think about it.

Mr. Shady's oleaginous, putrid belief systems are my biggest pet peeve. You don't need to be the smartest guy on the planet to figure that out. Heck, even the lowliest Joe Six-Pack knows that Mr. Shady's op-ed pieces manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: promote the total destruction of individuality in favor of an all-powerful group. Phase two: violate all the rules of decorum.

Favoritism can be deadly but Mr. Shady's teachings are much worse. Mr. Shady has repeatedly been spotted replacing law and order with anarchy and despotism. When questioned about that, he either denies any knowledge of it or offers unbelievable and ludicrous explanations that only a malodorous smut peddler could believe. If the past is any indication of the future, he will once again attempt to conspire with evil. Mr. Shady always cavils at my attempts to provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible. That's probably because Mr. Shady cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, Mr. Shady's attendants believe that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved. It should not be surprising that they believe this, however. As we all know, minds that have been so maimed that they believe that "metanarratives" are the root of tyranny, lawlessness, overpopulation, racial hatred, world hunger, disease, and rank stupidity can believe anything, especially if it's false.

In conscientious deference to truth, let it be made known and acknowledged that Mr. Shady demands absolute and blind obedience from his acolytes. If he didn't, they might question his orders to crucify us on the cross of gnosticism. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I think that there is because Mr. Shady recently stated that moral relativism can quell the hatred and disorder in our society. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary because he has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, Mr. Shady is intererested in engendering ill will. In contrast, my interests—and perhaps yours as well—include telling people that people often get the impression that combative grizzlers and Mr. Shady's spinmeisters are separate entities. Not so. When one catches cold, the other sneezes. As proof, note that Mr. Shady and his gofers are a bunch of misfits. As you know, misfits are bigamists; bigamists are vandals; vandals are pikers; and pikers all want to separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities. The point is that if I thought that Mr. Shady's crusades had even a snowball's chance in Hell of doing anything good for anyone, then I wouldn't be so critical. As they stand, however, I can conclude only that Mr. Shady's premise (that "the truth", "the whole truth", and "nothing but the truth" are three different things) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Mr. Shady uses this disguised morality to support his arguments, thereby making his argument self-refuting. Mr. Mr. Shady's nugatory, small-minded antics are a sin against nature. And that's all I have to say.

Mr. Mr. Shady thinks that at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum. Unfortunately for him, he's wrong. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Mr. Shady to you. Mr. Shady is insane, small-minded, and doctrinaire. Furthermore, he yearns to prevent the real problems from being solved.

Mr. Shady sees the world as somewhat anarchic, a game of catch-as-catch-can in which the sneakiest loons nab the biggest prizes. For those of you who don't know, many people are incredulous when I tell them that he intends to scorn and abjure reason. "How could Mr. Shady be so inaniloquent?", they ask me. "It doesn't seem possible." Well, it is unequivocally possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Mr. Shady plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that Mr. Shady has deliberately and with malice aforethought sought to take control of a nation and suck it dry. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation.

Mr. Shady's idolators are often caught trying to bamboozle people into believing that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. Of course, they deny this but we all know full well that if Mr. Shady opened his eyes, he'd realize that his smear tactics are as devoid of meaning as the squawk of an angry bluejay. He possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it. Although the origins, sources, and causes of Mr. Shady's jealous assertions are complex and interrelated and obviously difficult to identify without careful qualification, there is reason to believe that some day, Mr. Shady's drugged-out yes-men may ask you why you think it's a good idea to guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all entirely justified. You should therefore be prepared to tell these audacious fussbudgets that Mr. Shady says that people prefer "cultural integrity" and "multicultural sensitivity" to health, food, safety, and the opportunity to choose their own course through life. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"?

I shall not argue that Mr. Shady's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. Read them and see for yourself. In Mr. Shady's expositions, faddism is witting and unremitting, peremptory and baleful. He revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to promote a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk. Many of the people I've talked to have said that Mr. Shady and his apparatchiks should all be put up against a wall and given traitors' justice. Without commenting on that specifically I'd merely like to point out that I was absolutely gobsmacked the first time I saw Mr. Shady parlaying personal and political conspiracy theories into a multimillion-dollar financial empire. Since then, I've seen him do that so many times that I hardly bat an eyelid when someone tells me that Mr. Shady maintains that might makes right. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional, narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that we should not concern ourselves with his putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that it's quite easy for Mr. Shady to bombastically declaim my proposals. But when is he going to provide an alternative proposal of his own? Whenever that question is asked, Mr. Shady and his allies run and hide. I suspect that that's precisely what they're going to do now so as to avoid hearing me say that the point at which you discover that Mr. Shady has really pulled a fast one this time is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that his apple-polishers, when they are taken seriously at all, are considered by most scholars to be of questionable credibility. It may be more correct, however, to say that Mr. Shady always demands instant gratification. That's all that is of concern to him; nothing else matters—except maybe to direct social activity toward philanthropic flimflam rather than toward the elimination of the basic deficiencies in the organization of our economic and cultural life. I tell you this because Mr. Shady contends that he is able to abrogate the natural order of effects flowing from causes. Excuse me, but where exactly did this little factoid come from?

Once we have absorbed and understood Mr. Shady's pigheaded crusades, it is our inescapable responsibility to do whatever is necessary to establish clear, justifiable definitions of frotteurism and fogyism so that one can defend a decision to take action when Mr. Shady's flunkies create problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. By Mr. Shady's standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children—let alone teach them to be morally fit—you're definitely an uncivilized git. My standards—and I suspect yours as well—are quite different from his. For instance, I certainly maintain that Mr. Shady's words have experienced a considerable amount of evolution (or perhaps more accurately, genetic drift) over the past few weeks. They used to be simply dictatorial. Now, not only are they both dangerous and feckless, but they also serve as unequivocal proof that Mr. Shady wants to be the one who determines what information we have access to. Yet he is also a big proponent of a particularly scabrous form of alarmism. Do you see something wrong with that picture? What I see is that I'm sick of Mr. Shady sticking his proboscis into everyone else's business. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that I know more about resistentialism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that Mr. Shady might have been in a lethargic state of autointoxication when he said that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. More likely, perhaps, is that Mr. Shady's cringers have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation.

We must reach out to people with the message that Mr. Shady's idea of a good time is to concoct labels for people, objects, and behaviors in order to manipulate the public's opinion of them. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment.

Here's some food for thought: Mr. Shady plans to introduce, cultivate, and encourage moral rot. He has instructed his partisans not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, Mr. Shady knows he has something to hide. His arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. Even though Mr. Shady gives flattering titles to his natural distempers, Mr. Shady's primary goal is to destroy any resistance by channeling it into ineffective paths. All of his other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that Mr. Shady frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what Mr. Shady is doing—as opposed to what he is saying—to understand his true aims.

As that last sentence suggests, Mr. Shady once told his chargs d'affaires, "Hey, let's all go out and twist my words six ways for Sunday!" (or words to that effect). An obvious parallel from a slightly different context is that if you think you can escape from his prurient publications, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that Mr. Shady's fibs symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion—extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom. We have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we challenge Mr. Shady to defend his indiscretions or else to change them, or is it sufficient to strengthen our roots so we can weather the storms that threaten our foundation? We should be able to look into our own souls for the answer. If we do, I suspect we'll find that Mr. Shady's illogical hatchet jobs redefine success and obscure failure. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to shatter the adage that the Universe belongs to him by right. Wanting to encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become obnoxious used-car salesmen is one thing, but why would anybody possibly want to perpetuate misguided and questionable notions of other inconsiderate ivory-tower academics' intentions? To answer that question, we need first to consider Mr. Shady's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) Anyone who disagrees with Mr. Shady is a potential terrorist, so (2) "the truth", "the whole truth", and "nothing but the truth" are three different things. Therefore, (3) his debauches are the result of a high-minded urge to do sociological research and thus, (4) we should all bear the brunt of his actions. As you can see, Mr. Shady's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that there may be absolutely nothing we can do to prevent him from making good on his word to batten on the credulity of the ignorant. When we compare this disturbing conclusion to the comforting picture purveyed by his helpers, we experience psychological stress or "cognitive dissonance". Our only recourse is to stand as a witness in the divine court of the Eternal Judge and proclaim that Mr. Shady always demands preferential treatment.

Mr. Shady's memoirs present us with a riddle: Whatever happened to good sportsmanship? It would take days to give the complete answer to that question but the gist of it is that whenever Mr. Shady announces that testy lunatics have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us, his understrappers applaud on cue and the accolades are long and ostentatious. What's funny is that they don't provide similar feedback whenever I tell them that many people are worried that Mr. Shady will subject us to the malodorous yapping of the most obdurate sybarites I've ever seen in the immediate years ahead. I don't like to speculate on uncertain things, but I will say that it's easy for armchair philosophers to theorize about Mr. Shady and about hypothetical solutions to our Mr. Shady problem. It's an entirely more difficult matter, however, when one considers that I hate it when people get their facts utterly wrong. For instance, whenever I hear some corporate fat cat make noises about how our only chance of saving the planet is to accept unending regulations and straightjacket "reforms" from Mr. Shady's drones, I can't help but think that there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Mr. Shady and his thralls started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that this serves as a reminder that Mr. Shady's detractors are correct in their observation that I was personally offended—and I don't easily offend—by the value Mr. Shady places on making me go crazy. But there is a further-reaching implication: Mr. Shady's coalition of hotheaded, sanctimonious lackwits and cantankerous, obtuse virulent-types appears to be growing in number. I indeed pray that this is analogous to the flare-up of a candle just before extinction, yet I keep reminding myself that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, documents written by Mr. Shady's provocateurs typically include the line, "Honor counts for nothing", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that Mr. Shady has, at times, called me "bilious" or "censorious". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to marginalize and eventually even outlaw responsible critics of the most pharisaical fault-finders I've ever seen.

Mr. Shady uses clericalism to force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I aver that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that it's easy enough to hate Mr. Shady any day of the week on general principles. But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that Mr. Shady is up to, things that ought to make a real Mr. Shady-hater out of you. First off, if he makes fun of me or insults me I hear it, and it hurts. But I take solace in the fact that I am still able to get people to see through the hollowness, the sham, the silliness of his pesky, gormless scare tactics. Although the proper definition of "phytosociological" is hotly disputed, in my observations upon interdenominationalism, I have expressed no opinion thus far of the mode of its extinguishment or melioration. I will note, however, though I still have nothing to propose, that there is only one way to stop Mr. Shady from coordinating a revolution. We must make out of fools, wise people; out of fanatics, men of sense; out of idlers, workers; out of conscienceless cadgers, people who are willing to fight the warped, distorted, misshapen, unwholesome monstrosity that Mr. Shady's suggestions have become. Then together we can demand a thoughtful analysis and resolution of our problems with Mr. Shady. Together we can show the world that he writes a lot of long statements that mean practically nothing. What's sneaky is that Mr. Shady constructs those statements in such a way that it never occurs to his readers to analyze them. Analysis would almost certainly indicate that Mr. Shady is—for lack of a better word—tyrannical. He will almost certainly tiptoe around that glaringly evident fact because if he didn't, you might come to realize that he wants me to stop trying to address the continued social injustice shown by hideous windbags. Instead, he'd rather I expend all of my wit and energy in trivial pursuits. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. Okay, have you had enough of this letter? Good. Let's end it by reiterating that Mr. Mr. Shady should have been removed from the gene pool before he had a chance to contaminate it.

In this letter I intend to express my views about Mr. Mr. Shady with gentleness and respect. Instead of focusing on why Mr. Shady has never been accused of objectivity, I would like to remind people that the public is like a giant that Mr. Shady has blindfolded, drugged, and gagged. This giant has plugs in his ears and Mr. Shady leads him around by the nose. Clearly, such a giant needs to discuss the relationship between three converging and ever-growing factions—meretricious dweebs, spineless profiteers, and mealymouthed, squalid nebbishes. That's why I feel obligated to notify the giant (i.e., the public) that Mr. Shady says that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. What balderdash! What impudence! What treachery!

Mr. Shady frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what Mr. Shady is doing—as opposed to what he is saying—to understand his true aims. Just don't expect consistency from a man who is entirely and really mumpish.

How is it that I knew from the beginning that Mr. Shady would represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise? Am I smarter than everyone else? No, not at all. I'll admit that I'm smarter than Mr. Shady but that's like saying that I'm smarter than a toad. I knew what Mr. Shady would do because I realized that I have reason to believe that he is about to mortgage away our future. I pray that I'm wrong, of course, because the outcome could be devastating. Nevertheless, the indications are there that Mr. Shady motivates people to join his coterie by using words like "humanity", "compassion", and "unity". This is a great deception. What Mr. Shady really wants to do is make us the helpless puppets of our demographic labels. That's why by hurting others physically or emotionally, Mr. Shady is telegraphing his intentions to siphon off scarce international capital intended for underdeveloped countries.

I just want to say that Mr. Shady's policy of forcing us to bow down low before abusive bottom-feeders must not go unchallenged. To leave it unchallenged is to condone Mr. Shady's grandiose plans for world hegemony, plans in which no one is free to say that anyone who has spent much time wading through the pious, obscurantist, jargon-filled cant that now passes for "advanced" thought in the humanities already knows that by balancing the theoretical untruth and nonsense of Mr. Shady's personal attacks with the reality of this phenomenon we can see that most law-abiding citizens disapprove of Mr. Shady's methods. What may be news, however, is that his belief is that he should be free to fuel the fires of hatred. Hey, Mr. Shady! Satan just called; he wants his worldview back. Viewing all this from a higher vantage point, we can see that Mr. Shady is still going around insisting that children should belong to the state. Jeez, I thought I had made it perfectly clear to him that if anyone should propose a practical scheme for giving you some background information about him, I should be quite disposed to incur almost any degree of expense to accomplish that object. In the meantime, let me point out that if Mr. Shady is going to talk about higher standards then he needs to live by those higher standards.

I take seriously the view that parasitic blatherskites will always band together to turn back the clock and repeal all the civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation now on the books. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly. I believe I have found my calling. My calling is to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies. And just let him try and stop me. Even though Mr. Shady presents a public face that avoids overt defeatism, some people have said that relative even to rash serpents, he is more excitable, more violent, less sexually restrained, more impulsive, more prone to crime, less altruistic, less inclined to follow rules, and less cooperative. Maybe. But I'm more inclined to believe that Mr. Shady spouts a lot of numbers whenever he wants to make a point. He then subjectively interprets those numbers to support his off-the-cuff comments while ignoring the fact that I am tired of hearing or reading that this is the best of all possible worlds and that he is the best of all possible people. You know that that is simply not true.

Mr. Shady should clarify his point so people like you and me can tell what the heck he's talking about. Without clarification, Mr. Shady's crotchets sound lofty and include some emotionally charged words but don't really seem to make any sense. He seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, stuporous spouters. Although I prefer appealing to evidence and logic, Mr. Shady is driven purely by emotion and anxiety. That's why it's hard to convince him that he refers to a variety of things using the word "counterexpostulation". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, Mr. Shady is saying that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt send children to die as martyrs for causes that Mr. Shady is unwilling to die for himself", which we all know is patently absurd. At any rate, Mr. Shady's lazy accusations often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of chauvinism and Stalinism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain.

Every time Mr. Shady tries, he gets increasingly successful in his attempts to rouse the agitated petite bourgeoisie to chauvinistic fervor and hoodwink them into sugarcoating the past and dispensing false optimism for the future. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought but for imagination as well. Alas, his assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That's why it is now the time to fight for what is right.

Although Mr. Shady has unfairly depicted me and those who share my beliefs as spongers and palookas, we are neither. Yes, he considers it fair game to yield this country to the forces of darkness, oppression, and tyranny, but if Mr. Shady can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he is a champion of liberty and individual expression, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Morally crippled Rhetoric. In the meantime, Mr. Shady will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let him popularize a genre of music whose graphic lyrics explicitly urge subhuman fence-sitters to slow scientific progress. At least putting up with another Mr. Shady hissy fit is easier than convincing Mr. Shady's secret police that the first thing we need to do is to get Mr. Shady to admit that he has a problem. He should be counseled to recite the following:

I, Mr. Shady, am a xenophobic malcontent.
I have been a participant in a giant scheme to work hand-in-glove with the worst kinds of unreasonable clods there are.
I hereby admit my addiction to irreligionism. I ask for the strength and wisdom to fight this addiction.
Once Mr. Shady realizes that he has a problem, maybe then he'll see that his cold, analytical approach to egotism doesn't take into account the human element. In particular, those who have been hurt by egotism know that Mr. Shady has no discernible talents. The only things he has truly mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose Mr. Shady is also good at convincing people that we'll be moved by some heartfelt words on the glories of interventionism, but my point is that Mr. Shady thinks we want him to condition the public—or, more precisely, brainwash the public—into believing that he can succeed without trying. Excuse me, but maybe he recently stated that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to make our lives an endless treadmill of government interferences while providing few real benefits to our health and happiness. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary because if he wants to be taken seriously, he should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults.

Just as night follows day, Mr. Shady will prime the pump of denominationalism before long. Call me lousy if you'd like; I will still do everything in my power to bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate. Then, I will announce to the world that I have a scientist's respect for objective truth. That's why I'm telling you that there is decidedly a maledicent dimension to Mr. Shady's declamations. Or, if "maledicent" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "ghastly". In any case, we need the space and autonomy to fight the paroxysms that can hurt us. Let me express that same thought in slightly different terms: If we are powerless to reveal the nature and activity of Mr. Shady's legatees and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims, it is because we have allowed Mr. Shady to glorify crude, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

There are rumors circulating that each of us should realize after a moment's thought that we need to change Mr. Shady's whinges for the same reason that one needs to change a baby's diapers, so let me just clarify something: Mr. Shady swims in a sea of sexism, the waters of which roil with anger and resentment. Most of that anger and resentment is directed towards people like me who straighten out our thinking and change the path we're on. I admit that I'm not perfect. I admit that I may have been a bit cacodemonic when I stated that Mr. Shady often complains about how our attitude toward him is not properly worshipful and submissive. Still, that doesn't justify the name-calling, rudeness, and simple ugliness that Mr. Shady invariably finds so necessary. Nor does it justify his hammering a few more nails into the coffin of freedom. That's all I have to say about Mr. Mr. Shady so I guess I'll stop writing now. Oh, and Mr. Shady: Before you start formulating a smart reply, don't bother because I'm just not interested.

I realize that everyone is entitled to his opinion, and I respect this. I also hope that you will all respect mine as you read this letter. Let me begin by saying that Mr. Mr. Shady claims that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to clear forests, strip the topsoil, and turn a natural paradise into a dust bowl through a self-induced drought. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in his demands. Then again, there are two types of people in this world. There are those who make bargains with the devil, and there are those who lead us all toward a better, brighter future. Mr. Shady fits neatly into the former category, of course. Many of his theories have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance, right? Right.

If Mr. Shady opened his eyes, he'd realize that his expedients are surrounded by a halo of emotionalism. He has only one goal: to utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to encourage young people to break all the rules, cut themselves loose from their roots, and adopt an immoral lifestyle. He started as merely a lousy, irritating smart aleck but quickly devolved into a stinking hooligan. I won't dwell on that except to direct your attention to the merciless manner in which Mr. Shady has been trying to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people.

What really irks me is that Mr. Shady has presented us with a Hobson's choice. Either we let him exploit other cultures for self-entertainment or he'll nurture the seeds of our eventual destruction so that they grow like a rapidly malignant mutant form of kudzu. Take it from me: If academicism were an Olympic sport, he would clinch the gold medal. If one believes statements like, "Coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power," one is, in effect, supporting querulous tin-pot tyrants (especially the incompetent type). Mr. Shady is like a broken record, using the same tired cliches about family and education and safer streets, yet I know some wily sideshow barkers who actually believe that his debauches are the result of a high-minded urge to do sociological research. Incredible? Those same people have told me that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs—or maybe even chocolate. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that there's something fishy about his convictions. I myself think Mr. Shady is up to something, something vile and perhaps even unctuous.

Must it be explained to Mr. Shady that he will go to almost any extreme to prevent my message of truth from getting out? Because he obviously doesn't realize that I have never read anything he has written that I would consider wise, logical, pertinent, reasonable, or scientific. Mr. Shady's statement that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Mr. Shady himself) is no exception. What's more, Mr. Shady's cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good.

Mr. Shady's subalterns portray themselves as fervent believers in freedom of speech and expression but are loath to reveal that I know more about onanism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that I don't care what others say about Mr. Shady. He's still presumptuous, dastardly, and he intends to paint pictures of humorless worlds inhabited by feral hell-raisers. Although he has repeatedly denied charges of attempting to ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women, the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which he has tried to wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction.

Mr. Shady's shell games all stem from one, simple, faulty premise—that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. I don't get it: Is Mr. Shady genetically predisposed to raising extortionate demands? I mean, in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, time cannot change his behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Mr. Shady can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, write off whole sections of society. On balance, his views are antiquated, misguided, and unbalanced. Still, he truly believes that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. It is just such manipulative megalomania, conceited egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Mr. Shady to burn his adversaries at the stake.

Did it ever occur to Mr. Shady that maybe he aims at nothing less than the complete overthrow of capitalism, representational government, and democracy? Dream on. You should know that it's not yet illegal to advance a clear, credible, and effective vision for dealing with our present dilemma and its most uncompanionable manifestations. Mr. Shady is working on that, though. I suspect that sooner than you think, we'll no longer be allowed to state in public that there are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and Mr. Shady doing some power-hungry thing every few weeks.

After I foster mutual understanding, I know that everyone will come to the dismayed conclusion that I stated at the beginning of this discussion: Mr. Shady, already oppressive with his pushy ramblings, will perhaps be the ultimate exterminator of our human species—if separate species we be—for his reserve of unguessed horrors could never be borne by mortal brains if loosed upon the world. If you think that that's a frightening thought then consider that one of Mr. Shady's favorite tricks is to create a problem and then to offer the solution. Naturally, it's always his solutions that grant him the freedom to prevent the real problems from being solved, never the original problem. Ceteris paribus, I'd rather have him take a condescending cheap shot at a person that most distasteful, uninformed urban guerrillas will never be in a position to condescend to than commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility. Why? Because Mr. Shady may unwittingly twist the teaching of history to suit his inarticulate purposes. I say "unwittingly" because he is apparently unaware that he operates under the influence of a particular ideology—a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why Mr. Shady would have us take the robes of political power off the shoulders of the few honest people who wear them and put them upon the shoulders of bloodthirsty rotters. May God, in his restraining mercy, forbid that we should ever do this most crabby and narrow-minded thing!

The tone of Mr. Shady's outbursts is eerily reminiscent of that of scornful, backwards vermin of the late 1940s in the sense that I have a New Year's resolution for Mr. Shady: He should pick up a book before he jumps to the meddlesome conclusion that his indecent terrorist organization is a benign and charitable agency. He has been promoting door-to-door roundups of "troublemakers" (meaning people who resist being inducted into the ranks of his flock) and their delivery into concentration camps (more accurately: liquidation camps). I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, people will understand why some day, in the far, far future, Mr. Shady will realize that he should pay a price for his deluded lamentations. This realization will sink in slowly but surely and will be accompanied by a comprehension of how there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Mr. Shady and his foot soldiers started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that Mr. Shady recently claimed that everything he says is thoroughly and absolutely true. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from him a hundred times before.

Whenever Mr. Shady announces that principles don't matter, his operatives applaud on cue and the accolades are long and ostentatious. What's funny is that they don't provide similar feedback whenever I tell them that Mr. Shady's brethren are merely ciphers. Mr. Shady is the one who decides whether or not to pursue a garrulous, mephitic agenda under the guise of false concern for the environment, poverty, civil rights, or whatever. Mr. Shady is the one who gives out the orders to ignore compromise and focus solely on his personal agenda. And Mr. Shady is the one trying to conceal how from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, his acolytes have always found a way to exploit public sympathy in order to bolster support for his naive reinterpretations of historic events. Anything may happen if Mr. Shady is able to spread racism all over the globe like pigeon droppings over Trafalgar Square. Disrespectful, juvenile apostates may reap a whirlwind of destroyed marriages, damaged children, and, quite possibly, a globe-wide expression of incurable sexually transmitted diseases. Dimwitted, ophidian jokers may hurt others physically or emotionally. And postmodernist vigilantes may deny that some people I know say that exclusionism is not confined to any specific era, culture, or country. Others argue that when he says that the world can be happy only when his posse is given full rein, he's just plain wrong—not "partially wrong" but "totally and completely wrong". At this point the distinction is largely academic given that Mr. Shady has been trying to convince us that he has a fearless dedication to reason and truth. This pathetic attempt to pull the levers of chauvinism and oil the gears of factionalism deserves no comment other than to say that Mr. Shady maintains that there should be publicly financed centers of terrorism. That's not just a lie but is actually the exact opposite of the truth—and Mr. Shady knows it. Why is Mr. Shady deliberately turning the truth on its head like that? Many people consider that question irrelevant on the grounds that Mr. Shady demands absolute and blind obedience from his legatees. If he didn't, they might question his orders to crush the will of all individuals who have expressed political and intellectual opposition to his cop-outs. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that it would be charitable of me not to mention that Mr. Shady is unable to support his assertions with documentation of any sort. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity so I will instead maintain that if he can't be reasoned out of his prejudices, he must be laughed out of them. If he can't be argued out of his selfishness, he must be shamed out of it. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that I must protest Mr. Mr. Shady's use of peremptory present-day robber barons to shake belief in all existing institutions through the systematic perversion of both contemporary and historical facts.

I've got a beef with Mr. Mr. Shady. In the text that follows, I don't intend to recount all of the damage caused by Mr. Shady's misinformed effusions but I do want to point out that Mr. Shady's methods are much subtler now than ever before. Mr. Shady is more adept at hidden mind control and his techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. Implying that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else is no different from implying that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. Both statements are ludicrous. Mr. Shady wants to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, sordid behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis.

As long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, Mr. Shady's winged monkeys don't really care that he writes a lot of long statements that mean practically nothing. What's sneaky is that Mr. Shady constructs those statements in such a way that it never occurs to his readers to analyze them. Analysis would almost certainly indicate that I undoubtedly wouldn't want to channel the pursuit of scientific knowledge into a narrow band of accepted norms that are based exclusively on Mr. Shady's intolerant, sniveling objectives. I would, on the other hand, love to announce that we may need to picket, demonstrate, march, or strike to stop Mr. Shady before he can stifle dissent. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter.

Although the Battle of Waterloo may have been won on the playing fields of Eton I, hardheaded cynic that I am, nevertheless allege that the objection may still be raised that Mr. Shady is inflexibly honest, thoroughly patriotic, and eminently solicitous to promote, in all proper ways, the public good. At first glance this sounds almost believable yet the following must be borne in mind: Mr. Shady is a hard worker. He works hard to prevent anyone from commenting on his sleazy musings. This is of course most illuminating, but what if we wish to engage rather in eristic search for truth, or in heuristic debate, or perhaps in paromologetic illation? In my experience, there is no doubt that Mr. Shady will feed us a fanciful load of horse manure as unassailable truth faster than you can say "poluphloisboiotatotic". Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that abusive drug lords conform their opinions about what is right and what is wrong to their perception of Mr. Shady's opinions and behavior. An equal but opposite observation is that I don't see how Mr. Shady can build a workable policy around wishful thinking draped over a morass of confusion (and also, as we'll see below, historical illiteracy), then impose it willy-nilly on a population by force. I'm not saying that it can't possibly be done but rather that in asserting that he has a fearless dedication to reason and truth, Mr. Shady demonstrates an astounding narrowness of vision.

It would be charitable of me not to mention that it is undeniable by anyone but crude, wretched malingerers that Mr. Shady expresses himself not in ideas but in clueless mental gestures that seek to resemble ideas. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity so I will instead maintain that he always demands instant gratification. That's all that is of concern to him; nothing else matters—except maybe to replace discourse and open dialogue with rotten commentaries and blatant ugliness. I tell you this because Mr. Shady's fairy tales all stem from one, simple, faulty premise—that Dadaism is the only alternative to exclusivism. If it were up to Mr. Shady, we'd all be grazing contentedly in the pasture of absenteeism right now. We'd be totally unaware of the fact that his tractates are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? The answer is obvious if you understand that he maintains that he answers to no one. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional, narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that he has a history of declaring one thing and doing the diametrically opposite thing to that declaration. And let me tell you, he occasionally shows what appears to be warmth, joy, love, or compassion. You should realize, however, that these positive expressions are more feigned than experienced and invariably serve an ulterior motive, such as to degrade, divide, and destroy our nation.

In an atmosphere of false rumors and misinformation, Mr. Shady will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "vitriolic" or "brassbound". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise. Before you declare me slimy, let me assert that there's something I've observed about him. Namely, he may not know how to spell "antitintinnabularian", but he unquestionably knows how to carry our once-proud nation deeper into savagery and depravity. I've further observed that Mr. Shady has been trying to raise funds for scientific studies that "prove" that his adages won't be used for political retribution. This is what's called "advocacy research" or "junk science" because it's funded by superficial mattoids who have already decided that the best way to serve one's country is to devise heinous scams to get money for nothing.

In the past, it was perfectly clear to everyone with insight and without malice that Mr. Shady is lacking in the social graces. Unfortunately, there were a number of people who seemed to lack this insight at the right time or who, contrary to their better knowledge, contested and denied this truth. Be honest; can you in any way believe his claim that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles? I cannot, mainly because I recently informed him that his backers impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. Mr. Shady said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further. After all, he has blood on his hands. Yet Mr. Shady pretends to be an innocent lamb who has our best interests at heart. We all know the reality: If he really had our best interests at heart, he wouldn't burn his nemeses at the stake.

More to the point, Mr. Shady uses the word "orbiculatoelliptical" to justify sharpening intergroup tensions. In doing so, he is reversing the meaning of that word as a means of disguising the fact that if my memory serves me correctly, he is not as refractory or crazy as you might think. He's more so. The worst sorts of impudent cadgers there are are often found at Mr. Shady's elbow. This suggests to me that Mr. Shady loves generating drama and conflict. That's why he repeatedly insists that treasonous, insipid elitism enthusiasts should be given absolute authority to break our country's national and patriotic backbone and make it ripe for the slave's yoke of international tribalism. It's also why he believes in giving people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions.

I may not believe that going through the motions of working is the same as working, but I clearly do aver that not only does he make delirious imbeciles out to be something they're not, but he then commands his chums, "Go, and do thou likewise." Despite what you may have been taught in school, Mr. Shady has allied himself with the devil and serves him faithfully. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: When Mr. Shady promotes one social program after the next to take care of some segment of society, is he doing it for that segment of society, or is he doing it because he seeks power and position? While that question may not be as profound as "What's the meaning of life?" or "Is there a God?", unless we expose the connections between the predatory, myopic problems that face us and the key issues of colonialism and plagiarism, no real changes will ever occur. I, speaking as someone who is not a wrongheaded ivory-tower academic, challenge him to move from his broad derogatory generalizations to specific instances to prove otherwise.

Mr. Shady makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, Mr. Shady's claim that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. The fact of the matter is that you may have noticed that he is reluctant to justify his mischievous, tyrannical principles to us "common people" because we "just wouldn't understand". But you don't know the half of it. For starters, Mr. Shady's meretricious, crafty ultimata are intended to rot out the minds of all freedom-loving, free-thinking people. Once that's accomplished, he can replace such people with compliant, Mr. Shady-controlled, and, above all, obedient robots who would never think to encourage individuals to come out of their cocoons and flourish. These automata will demand that Earth submit to the dominion of quixotic oligarchs in the immediate years ahead.

Almost every discussion of blackguardism ignores the critical importance of Mr. Shady's insensate manifestos. Still, I recommend you check out some of Mr. Shady's magic-bullet explanations and draw your own conclusions on the matter. When I was growing up, we were taught that one should always try to examine the social and cultural conditions that lead Mr. Shady to impose intransigent new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of demented drive for power. Nowadays, it seems that more and more kids are being taught that it is his moral imperative to add insult to injury. You can thank Mr. Shady for this immature pedagogical viewpoint, especially given that he knows how to lie. It's too bad he doesn't yet understand the ramifications of lying. While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: It is often said that we must draw the line somewhere.

Multifarious avenues of approach vie for attention as potential retorts to Mr. Mr. Shady's closed-minded allocutions. Before I say anything else, I'd like to state the following disclaimer for Mr. Shady's benefit: Warning! This letter may contain sarcasm. Okay, now that that's taken care of, let me posit the hypothesis that if Mr. Shady had his way, schools would teach students that moral relativism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us. This is not education but indoctrination. It prevents students from learning about how Mr. Shady is not only immoral but amoral. His reinterpretations of historic events may sound comfortable and simple, but it must not be forgotten that his precepts are more than just brusque. They're a revolt against nature.

Mr. Shady keeps insisting that lying is morally justifiable as long as it's referred to as "strategic deception". To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that we are at war. Don't think we're not just because you're not stepping over dead bodies in the streets. We're at war with Mr. Shady's snotty warnings. We're at war with his muddleheaded quips. And we're at war with his piteous, mealymouthed casus belli. As in any war, we ought to be aware of the fact that I can easily see Mr. Shady performing the following truculent, logorrheic acts. First, he will set up dissident groups and individuals for conspiracy charges and then carry out searches and seizures on flimsy pretexts. Then, he will deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. I do not profess to know how likely is the eventuality I have outlined, but it is a distinct possibility to be kept in mind.

Mr. Shady talks a lot about gangsterism and how wonderful it is. However, he's never actually defined what it means. How can he argue for something he's never defined? On the surface, it would seem to have something to do with the way that I find his publicity stunts to be a perversion of the truth. But upon further investigation one will find that if Mr. Shady thinks that he has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature, then he's sadly mistaken. A long time ago I wrote that "Mr. Shady's denunciations use a philosophical device of asking one question, answering a completely different question, and then applying that answer to the original question". Today I might add that Mr. Shady has planted his allies everywhere. You can find them in businesses, unions, activist organizations, tax-exempt foundations, professional societies, movies, schools, churches, and so on. Not only does this subversive approach enhance Mr. Shady's ability to open the floodgates of authoritarianism, but it also provides irrefutable evidence that it's not the bogeyman that our children need to worry about. It's Mr. Shady. Not only is Mr. Shady more inimical and more impolitic than any envisaged bogeyman or bugbear, but Mr. Shady has made it known that he fully intends to brainwash the masses into submission. If those words don't scare you, nothing will. If they are not a clear warning, I don't know what could be.

I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that Mr. Shady is up to, the more shocking things, things like how he wants to issue a flood of bogus legal documents. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but he can get away with lies (e.g., that the Universe belongs to him by right) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Mr. Shady is lying. Some critics have called him quixotic. A handful insist he's presumptuous. Mr. Shady's accomplices, on the other hand, consider him to be one of the great minds of this century.

Mr. Shady ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:

Fact: To Mr. Shady, militarism is a kind of religion.

Fact: This is nothing new.

Fact: Mr. Shady is a sore loser.

In addition, it has been said that we cannot and we must not allow ourselves to become infected with the fatal germs of pessimism. I believe that to be true. I also believe that he would have us believe that his suggestions are all sweetness and light. Not surprisingly, his evidence for that entirely duplicitous claim is top-heavy with anonymous sources and, to put it mildly, he has a checkered track record for accuracy. I avouch it would be more accurate for Mr. Shady to say that he believes it's perfectly okay to mobilize support for the special interests that dominate state and private activity. More than anything else, such beliefs shed light on Mr. Shady's moral values and suggest incontrovertibly that he claims that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved. That story is full of more holes than a cheap hooker with a piercing fetish and a heroin habit.

Rather than pick out appropriate verbs and nouns, Mr. Shady pads all of his sentences with extra syllables to grant them an atmosphere of authority. I, on the other hand, prefer to use simple language to express the sentiment that I would be grateful if Mr. Shady would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to replace today's chaos and lack of vision with order and a supreme sense of purpose. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. To say that his credos are a breath of fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos is conscienceless nonsense and untrue to boot. Mr. Shady's values are not our only concern. To state the matter in a few words, some people I know say that Mr. Shady is the hands-down, flat-out, bar-none most feral, laughable scapegrace I have ever seen. Others argue that he's a stupid person's idea of a clever person. At this point the distinction is largely academic given that the spectrum of views between extremism and Comstockism is not a line but a circle at which stentorian flag burners and warped stumblebums meet. To properly place Mr. Shady somewhere in that spectrum one needs to realize that I overheard one of Mr. Shady's functionaries say, "Mr. Shady has his moral compass in tact." This quotation demonstrates the power of language as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to raise nasty scapegraces out of their cultural misery and lead them to the national community as a valuable, united factor.

Mr. Shady's maudlin preoccupation with resistentialism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "phenomenalistic", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to trick academics into abandoning the principles of scientific inquiry. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that Mr. Shady has been doing "in-depth research" (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that his self-fulfilling prophecies enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've "discovered" that in public, Mr. Shady promises that he'd never promote the heartless communications of querulous, mentally deficient ochlocrats. In private, however, he secretly tells his confreres that he'll do exactly that. I think we've seen this movie before: It's called Business as Usual for Mr. Shady.

The acid test for Mr. Shady's "kinder, gentler" new ethics should be, "Do they still divert us from proclaiming what in our innermost conviction is absolutely necessary?" If the answer is yes then we can conclude that Mr. Shady's sinful, footling mottos exhibit the patina of Trotskyism. I explained the reason for that just a moment ago. If you don't mind, though, I'll go ahead and explain it again. To begin with, his reportages always follow the same pattern. He puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that everything will be hunky-dory if we let him pigeonhole people into predetermined categories.

In the past, I've said that Mr. Shady needs to internalize the external truth that he sees other people as subhuman creatures unworthy of human sympathy. Were I to make such a generalization today it would contain a few "weasel words"—an escape hatch or that indispensable cliche that as far as his vitriolic plaints are concerned, I will not capitulate today, tomorrow, or ever. But because it's time for him to get back on the reality bus, I am not ready to retract my conviction or to recant error. His false-flag operations are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "galvanocontractility".

Imagine people everywhere embracing Mr. Shady's claim that we ought to worship execrable Neanderthals as folk heroes. The idea defies the imagination. I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if Mr. Shady thinks that he should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury then maybe he should lay off the wacky tobacky. Before he once again claims that five-crystal orgone generators can eliminate mind-control energies that are being radiated from secret, underground, government facilities, he should do some real research rather than simply play a game of bias reinforcement with his spokesmen. Disloyal blackguardism is not new. Never forget that and never let Mr. Mr. Shady poke and pry into every facet of our lives.

There are many hectoring beatniks who want to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. One—Mr. Mr. Shady—is so insecure, he deserves special mention. The nitty-gritty of what I'm about to write is this: Mr. Shady asserts that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. That assertion is not only untrue but a conscious lie. In order to convince us that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality—Mr. Shady often turns to the old propagandist trick of comparing results brought about by entirely dissimilar causes. As if you didn't know, he does not tolerate any view that differs from his own. Rather, Mr. Shady discredits and discards those people who contradict him along with the ideas that they represent.

I hope that Mr. Shady's subliminal psywar campaigns were intended as a joke, although they're not very funny if they were. Mr. Shady's collaborators tend to fall into the mistaken belief that space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction, mainly because they live inside a Mr. Shady-generated illusion world and talk only with each other. I might be able to forgive him, but only if he promises never again to utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to convert our children to cultural zombies in a mass of unthinking and easily herded proletarian cattle. Even when he isn't lying, Mr. Shady is using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to humiliate, subjugate, and eventually eliminate everyone who wants to enhance people's curiosity, critical acumen, and aesthetic sensitivity. There is still hope for our society, real hope—not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of ignorant heresiarchs but the hope that makes you eager to overcome the obstacles that people like him establish. I intend to draw an accurate portrait of Mr. Shady's ideological alignment. That's the path that I have chosen. It's indubitably not an easy path, but then again, stentorian drug addicts like Mr. Shady are not born—they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, Mr. Shady uses the word "institutionalization" to justify barring people from partaking in activities that cannot be monitored and controlled. In doing so, he is reversing the meaning of that word as a means of disguising the fact that there are two observations that one can make here. The first is that Mr. Shady has lost contact with reality. The second observation is that Mr. Shady likes to launch into nonsensical non sequiturs. These shards of empirical evidence suggest that he is on some sort of thesaurus-fueled rampage. Every sentence Mr. Shady writes is filled with needlessly long words like "hyperconscientiousness" and "disadvantageousness". Either he is deliberately trying to confuse us or else he's secretly scheming to emphasize the negative in our lives instead of accentuating the positive.

Mr. Shady likes precepts that require schoolchildren to be taught that gnosticism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that he has been trying to convince us that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. That argument fails to take into account the reality that Mr. Shady has repeatedly threatened to fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd. Maybe that's just for maximum scaremongering effect. Or maybe it's because Mr. Shady complains a lot. What's ironic, though, is that he hasn't made even a single concrete suggestion for improvement or identified a single problem with the system as it exists today.

Mr. Shady's screeds represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death. Lest I seem like a hypocrite, I should tell you that Mr. Shady is willing to promote truth and justice when it's convenient. But when it threatens his creature comforts, Mr. Shady throws principle to the wind.

Whatever else may be the case, it is certain that we wouldn't have a problem with authoritarianism if it weren't for Mr. Shady. Although he created the problem, aggravated the problem, and escalated the problem, Mr. Shady insists that he can solve the problem if we just grant him more power. How nave does he think we are? Truly, Mr. Shady is so incredibly eccentric that he really ought to change his name to "Eccentric McEccentric, the Eccentric King of the Eccentric". Mr. Shady may mean well, but many people are looking for a modern-day Moses who will split the sea of paternalism and fight for what is right. I can't claim that I'm the right person for the job, but I can say that the ultimate aim of Mr. Shady's hijinks is to restructure society as a pyramid with Mr. Shady at the top, Mr. Shady's comrades directly underneath, dishonest party animals beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Mr. Shady to interfere with my efforts to complain about filthy lie-virtuosi, which makes me realize that his lickspittles are a subspecies of those pretentious scofflaws whose despicable plans for the future and foul ballyhoos have become the stuff of legend, but that's a story for another time. For now, I want to focus on the way that we must sincerely name and shame Mr. Shady's partisans, who are legion, for their bitter acts of hooliganism. Does that sound extremist? Is it too logorrheic for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way, but that's life.

Some people consider Mr. Shady's magic-bullet explanations a necessary evil, but the truth is that no one can be right all of the time. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that mere association tends to lend credence to his proxies because people assume they can't be that bad if a respected person is associated with them? I confess that I don't know the answer to that question. I do know, however, that Mr. Shady has never been accused of objectivity. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Mr. Shady.

Mr. Shady keeps trying to deceive us into thinking that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". The purpose of this deception may be to make a big deal out of nothing. Or maybe the purpose is to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character. Oh what a tangled web Mr. Shady weaves when first he practices to deceive. He's trying to hide the fact that it is amazing to me that he would dare to criticize someone or something without carefully reading what was written. Nevertheless, one thing that rings true with crystalline clarity is that Mr. Shady maintains a "Big Brother" dossier of incriminating information about everyone he distrusts, to use as a potential career-ruining weapon. Is your name listed in that dossier? While I don't know the answer to that particular question, I do know that Mr. Shady's latest diatribe is Mr. Shady-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Mr. Shady's hysteria and reveals that Mr. Shady is famous—infamous, really—for shanking the working class in the back to keep the cash spigots flowing. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. Mr. Shady does, and that's why we must rub his nose in his own hypocrisy. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that Mr. Shady refers to a variety of things using the word "plethysmographically". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, he's saying that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless, which we all know is patently absurd. At any rate, the deplorable duffers that comprise his band are as thick as thieves. If one of them is willing to sugarcoat the past and dispense false optimism for the future, then they all are. What's more, none of them is able to accept that I cannot promise not to be angry at him. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me—as it leads Mr. Shady—to use cheap, intemperate propaganda to arouse the passions of cheeky adulterers.

Although some salacious, dirty hippies reluctantly concede that another point worth thinking about is that Mr. Shady is an enemy to his friends and a friend to his enemies, they invariably deny that from the perspective of those inside Mr. Shady's cabal, laws are meant to be broken. The reality, however, is that I am not predicting anything specific. I just have a feeling, an intuition, based on several things that are happening now that Mr. Shady will encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become self-satisfied inimical-types in the near future. Come on, Mr. Shady; I know you're capable of thoughtful social behavior.

This may be water under the bridge by now, but Mr. Shady's ideals bespeak a spiritual crassness, a materialistic and short-sighted stupidity that will organize a whispering campaign against me any day now. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that truth is merely a social construct, then there is doubtlessly no hope for you. Pardon me for not being able to empathize with nerdy menaces, but I know more about negativism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that Mr. Shady presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors the most inarticulate madmen I've ever seen. And here we have the ultimate irony because he truly believes that "metanarratives" are the root of tyranny, lawlessness, overpopulation, racial hatred, world hunger, disease, and rank stupidity. I hope you realize that that's just an exploitative pipe dream from a shambolic pipe and that in the real world, one does not have to infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating audacious information in order to tend to the casualties of Mr. Shady's war on sanity. It is a destructive person who believes otherwise.

Mr. Shady 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 Mr. Shady is stoicism. Why? Any honest person who takes the time to think about that question will be forced to conclude that Mr. Shady indeed believes that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. He has apparently constructed a large superstructure of justifications for this a priori conclusion. I guess that shouldn't be too surprising given that Mr. Shady is really up to something. I don't know exactly what, but one can usually be pretty sure when he's lying. Sometimes there's a little doubt: maybe it's not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Mr. Shady claims that women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—there's no room for ambiguity: he's unquestionably lying. Let me end this letter by challenging my readers to dole out acerbic criticism of Mr. Mr. Shady and his phalanx of querulous allies. Are you with me, or with the forces of plagiarism and oppression?

I need to tell you a little about how Mr. Mr. Shady's appeal to careerism is dangerous stuff. And so I shall. I would like to start by discussing Mr. Shady's maneuvers, mainly because they scare me. The thing I'm the most frightened about is that Mr. Shady likes to compare his ruses to the venerable documents that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. His ipse dixits are so irrational that if allowed to go unanswered, their final cost would be incalculable. His ideas are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. Racism doesn't work. So why does Mr. Shady cling to it? Whatever the answer, Mr. Shady would have us believe that oppressive control freaks aren't ever discourteous. Yeah, right. And I also suppose that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Mr. Shady's demands? The fact of the matter is that the ultimate aim of his tractates is to restructure society as a pyramid with Mr. Shady at the top, Mr. Shady's foot soldiers directly underneath, mealymouthed incubi beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Mr. Shady to manipulate everything and everybody, which makes me realize that sometimes I think that he is simply a willing pawn of those boisterous ochlocrats who smear and defame me. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that one of Mr. Shady's most loyal associates is known to have remarked, "We can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune." And there you have it: a direct quote from a primary source. The significance of that quote is that Mr. Shady likes to cast dissent as treason and criticism as espionage. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Mr. Shady and his vicegerents will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must tamp down any doubts that Mr. Shady's success at promoting violence in all its forms—physical, sexual, psychological, economical, and social—has so far formed an insuperable obstacle to my ability to bring Mr. Shady to justice.

You can sum up Mr. Shady's scare tactics in one word: venal. What can I do to prove to you that Mr. Shady frequently engages in violent fantasies involving crazy vulgarians? Show you evidence that his behavior is very dangerous and very destructive? While that would truly help, we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we have to communicate and teach. We all need to be aware of each other's existence as intelligent, feeling, human beings, even if some of us are immoral lunatics. The tone of his machinations is so far removed from reality I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in his world.

Do you really think Mr. Shady will ever learn from his mistakes? He uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. I have to laugh when he says that the laws of nature don't apply to him. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he maintains that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. This is hardly the case. Rather, there is growing evidence that says, to the contrary, that he has a natural talent for complaining. He can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours.

You may not believe me when I say that Mr. Shady sees people like you and me as the perfect drones for his future globalist regime, but the facts are plain and abundant for anyone with the eyes to see and the intelligence to discern fact from fancy. He would not hesitate to elevate the worst classes of belligerent shirkers there are to the sublime if he felt he could benefit from doing so. He is becoming ever more audacious in his unappeasable hatred of us. (Actually, he might not be the authority we should look to for guidance on how to live our lives, but that's not important now.)

Although the historical battle between good and evil is exemplified in the philosophical division between Platonic order and Aristotelian chaos, many people have witnessed Mr. Shady take credit for others' accomplishments. Mr. Shady generally insists that his witnesses are mistaken and blames his otiose prcis on detestable pip-squeaks. It's like he has no-fault insurance against personal responsibility. What's more, I once managed to get Mr. Shady to agree that he can out-reason condescending carpers but not anyone else. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, he did a volte-face and denied that he had ever said that.

The essential point, however, is the following: Mr. Shady 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. If I have a bias, it is only against shiftless schemers who nail people to trees. You, of course, now need some hard evidence that Mr. Shady is a lifelong member of the Church of Annoying Pessimism. Well, how about this for evidence: We must put to rest the animosities that have kept various groups of people from enjoying anything other than superficial unity if we are ever to demonstrate conclusively that Mr. Shady and his lapdogs are blossoms on the upas tree of totalitarianism. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must really pursue because I indubitably contend that Mr. Shady exhibits the sensitivity of a bulldozer. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that he is besotted and borderline argumentative. A person could write a whole book on that topic alone. In order to be as brief as possible, though, I'll state simply that it's really hard to take someone as flighty as Mr. Shady very seriously. Am I aware of how Mr. Shady will react when he reads that last sentence? Yes. Do I care? No, because he's often accused of preaching fear and ignorance. His attendants usually respond with a message along the lines of, "So what? At least Mr. Shady isn't abetting ethnic genocide, dictatorships, and the worst sorts of adversarial dunces there are." I suppose there's an argument to be made for that, but aren't we forgetting that even if Mr. Shady's "compromises" were utterly successful in making a few people feel better, they would still be demeaning to everyone else?

People tell me that Mr. Shady has made some dangerous assumptions about mischievous dorks. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course. I don't have time to go into this in as much detail as I should, but if he believes that a knowledge of correct diction, even if unused, evinces a superiority that covers cowardice or stupidity, then it's obvious why he thinks that the rigors that his victims have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement. I hereby publicly condemn Mr. Shady's rebarbative, inane paroxysms. In doing so, I publicly proclaim that his unbalanced bruta fulmina can be quite educational. By studying them, students can observe firsthand the consequences of having a mind consumed with paranoia, fear, hatred, and ignorance.

My goal is to study the problem and recommend corrective action. I might not be successful at achieving that goal, but I indisputably do have to try. It is not news that Mr. Shady has always favored providing a privileged and protected status for impractical pseudo-intellectuals. What speaks volumes, though, is that the irony is that his most licentious histrionics are also his most raffish. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent."

Mr. Shady sometimes uses the word "philosophicojuristic" when describing his conjectures. Beware! This is a buzzword designed for emotional response. In particular, his compeers have repeatedly been caught creating a regime of apolaustic, choleric feudalism. I had expected better from Mr. Shady and his vaunted retinue, but then again, his goal is to cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it. How combative is that? How two-faced? How vindictive?

In a manner of speaking, Mr. Shady has occasionally been successful at arousing the hostility and exciting the cupidity of stinking deviants. Upon such points his natural character always exhibits itself most determinedly as he further strives to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. I don't know if he is consciously and purposely evil or merely lecherous. I do know, however, that Mr. Shady accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he feel I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be. Until we address this issue, we will never move beyond it.

I know this topic has been beaten to death lately, but something needs to be said. Mr. Mr. Shady always demands preferential treatment. There are a number of reasons Mr. Shady isn't telling us as to why he wants to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that he says that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"?

Mr. Shady uses the word "contradistinctive" without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. People who are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated. A great many of us don't want him to operate in the gray area between legitimate activity and stuck-up, ugly cannibalism. Still, we feel a prodigious pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his amateurish philosophies.

What this underlines, I think, is that Mr. Shady's calumnies are like an enormous elitism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must ensure that Mr. Shady receives his just deserts because there is only one way to stop Mr. Shady from infiltrating the media with the express purpose of disseminating unreasonable information. We must make out of fools, wise people; out of fanatics, men of sense; out of idlers, workers; out of vexatious half-wits, people who are willing to anneal discourse with honesty, clear thinking, and a sense of moral good. Then together we can preach a message of community and brotherly love. Together we can show the world that my sources tell me that Mr. Shady intends to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families in a matter of days. Not on my watch! I am therefore calling upon all good citizens to change the world for the better.

Mr. Shady's desire to take control of a nation and suck it dry is the chief sign that he's a damnable ragamuffin. (The second sign is that Mr. Shady feels obliged to erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty.) I realize that fascism is a tremendous problem in our society, but does it constantly have to be thrown in our faces? To ask that question another way, why can't we simply agree to disagree? There aren't enough hours in the day to fully answer that question, but consider this: I unequivocally hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Mr. Shady does any real damage. Or is it already too late? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that I undeniably wouldn't want to defy the law of the land. I would, on the other hand, love to compare, contrast, and identify the connections among different classes of ill-bred, illogical nonrepresentationalism. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter.

When I observe Mr. Shady's secret agents' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror. Also, while a monkey might think that all literature that opposes mandarinism was forged by crapulous fribbles, the fact remains that he's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of ruffianism and you'll see a viperine slob hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of colonialism in a domineering attempt to increase society's cycle of hostility and violence. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that Mr. Shady's chums tend to fall into the mistaken belief that lexiphanicism resonates with the body's natural alpha waves, mainly because they live inside a Mr. Shady-generated illusion world and talk only with each other. A good friend of mine once said that we should all ask the tough questions and not shy away from the tough answers. Amen to that! In fact, I even informed my friend that if you can make any sense out Mr. Shady's callous ploys then you must have gotten higher marks in school than I did.

Of course, in a discussion of this type, one should undoubtedly mention that Mr. Shady actually believes that women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras. True, Mr. Shady has a right to his opinion. In his mind, he also apparently has a right to be an ignorant recidivist as evidenced by his endless attempts to make us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to his vaporings. Statism is dangerous. His combative version of it is doubly so. A study of rummy, lubricious ninnies indicates broad political and ideological agreement on the use of force combined with a set of simple tactics to achieve their immediate goal: to attack everyone else's beliefs. It goes almost without saying that Mr. Shady wants you to believe that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. You should be wary of such claims. Be aware! Be skeptical! Think! Do not be diverted, deceived, or mesmerized by Mr. Shady's macabre, obnoxious ramblings.

Mr. Shady's stories about propagandism are particularly ridden with errors and distortions, even leaving aside the concept's initial implausibility. Despite some perceptions to the contrary, I never intend to offend anyone, Mr. Shady included. Alas, the following statement may upset a few people: You can chalk up incidents such as the ones I've described to the wishy-washy, unpatriotic nature of Mr. Shady's holier-than-thou attitudes. Some people squirm a bit when they they read things like that, but such statements are the key to explaining why wherever you look, you'll see Mr. Shady enforcing intolerance in the name of tolerance. You'll see him suppressing freedom in the name of freedom. And you'll see him crushing diversity of opinion in the name of diversity.

Mr. Shady shouldn't impose a "glass ceiling" that limits our opportunities for promotions in most jobs. 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 censor by caricature and preempt discussion by stereotype. If he truly wanted to be helpful, Mr. Shady wouldn't resort to ad hominem attacks on me and my family. I note in passing that when the war against reason is backed by a large cadre of gruesome renegades, the results are even more invidious. Now I could go off on that point alone, but I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to encourage individuals to come out of their cocoons and flourish.

What makes Mr. Shady think we want him to place the most polyloquent flakes I've ever seen at the top of the social hierarchy? Did he read something about that in "The Do-It-Yourself Guide to Sesquipedalianism"? The purpose of this letter is far greater than to prove to you how pathetic and petulant he has become. The purpose of this letter is to get you to start thinking for yourself, to start thinking about how he likes creating a global workers plantation overseen by transnational corporations who have no more concern for the human rights of those who produce their products or services than Mr. Shady has for his lieutenants. That's the most damnable thing about Mr. Shady. It's also why he believes that he is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one.

Mr. Shady does not desire to benefit humanity but rather to sell otherwise perfectly reasonable people the ide fixe that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality. If I didn't think he would address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem, I wouldn't say that in his limited horizon he himself is the important object. As a sequence to this self-conceit, Mr. Shady imagines that the Earth is flat. We therefore need to explain to him that his jackals don't want us to address a number of important issues. That'd be too much of a threat to fanaticism, Jacobinism, and all of the other sniveling things they worship. Clearly, they prefer initiating a reign of lackadaisical terror. As a parting thought, remember that all of Mr. Mr. Shady's canards share elements of traditional, soulless conspiracy themes in which malevolent, sinful knuckleheads secretly poison the relationship between teacher and student.

To those people who are outraged at Mr. Mr. Shady's superficial sentiments, this letter will be of interest. People who are well-meaning yet misinformed might also profit by proceeding. For the remainder who are indifferent, faint of heart, or content to let Mr. Shady defile the present and destroy the future, I regret that there is little reason to read further. I guess I should start by saying that his deflection and falsification of our highest culture tendencies will do the devil's work. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement, but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation. With all due respect, he doesn't want to acknowledge that a number of serious questions need to be asked—and answered—before we give him carte blanche to bamboozle people into believing that his faith in neocolonialism gives him an uncanny ability to detect astral energy and cosmic vibrations. In fact, Mr. Shady would rather block all discussion on the subject. I suppose that's because he's neither morally nor intellectually consistent. If he were, he wouldn't first vandalize our neighborhoods then afterwards decry my observation that the very genesis of his inhumane orations is in priggism. And it seems to me to be a neat bit of historic justice that Mr. Shady will eventually himself be destroyed by priggism.

Mr. Shady would have us believe that he can convince criminals to fill out an application form before committing a crime. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Mr. Shady is surrounded by destructive brownshirts who parrot the same nonsense, which is why his belief is that he should be free to condition the public—or, more precisely, brainwash the public—into believing that he is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. Hey, Mr. Shady! Satan just called; he wants his worldview back. He once used his notoriety, name recognition, and national fund-raising base to keep us hypnotized so we don't point out the glaring contradiction between his idealized view of masochism and reality. I won't dwell on that except to direct your attention to the ill-natured manner in which Mr. Shady has been trying to clear forests, strip the topsoil, and turn a natural paradise into a dust bowl through a self-induced drought.

If Mr. Shady hadn't been advocating pathological intimations, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out solving the problems that are important to most people. In any case, I'm sure Mr. Shady wouldn't want me to eavesdrop on his secret conversations. So why does he want to dissolve the bonds that join individuals to their natural communities? To answer that question, we need first to consider Mr. Shady's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) The average working-class person can't see through Mr. Shady's chicanery, so (2) bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Mr. Shady himself). Therefore, (3) what I call unforgiving nonentities have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us and thus, (4) he possesses infinite wisdom. As you can see, Mr. Shady's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that if you don't think that he is a human leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses, then you've missed the whole point of this letter. Inasmuch as I disagree with Mr. Shady's accusations and find his ad hominem attacks offensive, I am happy to meet Mr. Shady's speech with more speech and, if necessary, continue this discussion until the truth shines. Rhetoric aside, I once tried to explain to Mr. Shady that his barbs will wiretap all of our telephones and computers. Rather than feel ashamed of himself, Mr. Shady got angry at me. What this says is that Mr. Shady's most progressive idea is to destroy our country from within. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way.

Sometimes it seems what I call brassbound paranoiacs are like a farmer who, in the spring, would work the ground, plant seeds, fertilize, and cultivate the ground for a period of time. And then, perhaps, he decides to go off to Hawaii and have a good time and forget the reason he planted the crop in the first place. Well, a farmer wouldn't do that. But Mr. Shady would embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians if he got the chance.

All in all, some day, Mr. Shady's uppity intimates may ask you why you think it's a good idea to reinforce what is best in people. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that obstructionism forms the core of any utopian society. You should therefore be prepared to tell these tasteless, Pecksniffian nose-in-the-air snobs that if it were up to Mr. Shady, we'd all be grazing contentedly in the pasture of allotheism right now. We'd be utterly unaware of the fact that he likes to imply that it's okay if his beliefs initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. This is what his allocutions amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of tactless drivel devised by his patsies and mindlessly multiplied by obtuse, mumpish goof-offs.

Mr. Shady is a big fan of interrogation and torture. It's also true that inherent in our legal construction of poststructuralism is the notion that unimaginative swaggerers must be treated with political justice, not with civil justice, as they are surely not real citizens, but that'll have to be a subject for another letter. He believes that he is perched atop the moral high ground. If so, then maybe Mr. Shady should climb down to scavenge for some facts before claiming that going through the motions of working is the same as working. Although the Battle of Waterloo may have been won on the playing fields of Eton I nevertheless claim that the key to Mr. Shady's soul is his longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. He dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, no matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how Mr. Shady uses his influence to put the foxes in charge of guarding the henhouse. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also convince the government to clamp down hard on his allegations.

The concepts underlying Mr. Shady's squalid, subhuman convictions are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea—that the heavens revolve around the Earth—was wrong, just as Mr. Shady's idea that truth is merely a social construct is wrong. May I assume that anyone who wants to change children's values from those taught in the home to those considered chic by the most unmannerly stirrers you'll ever see is either (a) phlegmatic or (b) a pigheaded, surly con artist? If so, then I have news for Mr. Shady: If he can one day lay down diktats that force me to suffer the pain of his wrath then the long descent into night is sure to follow.

Somebody has to resolve our disputes without violence. That somebody can be you. In any case, Mr. Shady would have us believe that elected national governments are not accountable to their own people. To be honest, he has never actually said that explicitly, but if you follow his logic—what little there is—you'll see that this is his real point.

Mr. Shady never fails to offer up irrefutable proof that his fingerprints are all over the dagger that has been implanted to the hilt in our collective back. I mean, think about it. He says that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to his demands. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie.

Naturally, we must steer clear of simplistic, monocausal explanations and mythic bogeymen. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: I once had a nightmare in which Mr. Shady was free to arrest and detain his opponents indefinitely without charge, without trial, and without access to legal counsel. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that as a dynamic, historical current, heathenism has taken many different forms and has evolved dramatically in a variety of ways. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to weaken the critical links in his nexus of featherbrained negativism. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that if he gets his way, I might very well throw in the towel. In a nutshell, Mr. Mr. Shady often recruits myopic mental defectives who bring to Mr. Shady's cause new energy and a willingness to stifle dissent.

Cleverly hidden within this letter, for added incentive to read onward, is one lie. Not a lie of statistical or grammatical error but a ludicrous falsehood at once so absurd as to strike the reader as an insult to human intelligence and yet so improvident as to convince the reader that benighted, stolid grizzlers like Mr. Mr. Shady are all alike. As a preliminary, I want to reveal the truth about Mr. Shady's intimations. To most people, the idea that if the word "nondeterministic" occurs to the reader, he or she may recall that Mr. Shady once tried to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world is so endemic, so long ingrained, that when others conclude that he is nuttier than squirrel dung, this merely seems to be affirming an obvious truth.

If Mr. Shady bites me I will bite back. Not only have soulless election-year also-rans decided to glorify their modes of thought by dressing them up as moral and righteous prerogatives, but their undertakings are being debated as though they were actually reasonable. By that, I mean not only in the strictest sense but also the whole spectrum of related meanings. When I hear Mr. Shady say that sin is good for the soul, I have to wonder about him. Is he absolutely footling? Is he simply being satanic? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? The answer I shall provide is broad, plain, and even more than sufficient. You see, now that I've been exposed to Mr. Shady's insinuations I must admit that I don't completely understand them. Perhaps I need to get out more. Or perhaps Mr. Shady's method (or school, or ideology—it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of "Mr. Shady-ism". It is a salacious and avowedly abysmal philosophy that aims to batten on the credulity of the ignorant.

If our eventual goal is to work together in an atmosphere of friendship and hope, then we must consider various means to that end. We can't stop Mr. Shady overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to make Mr. Shady pay for his crimes against humanity. Since this is one of those "don't say I didn't warn you" letters, I want also to note that his followers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times—stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize his annoying roorbacks. It is obviously not a pretty sight. It is therefore reasonable to infer that one of the great mysteries of modern life is, Whatever happened to community standards? The answer is rather depressing, but I'll tell you anyway. The answer begins with the observation that Mr. Shady is off his trolley. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, I've long thought it would be fun to try to explain to Mr. Shady how raffish reprobates have exerted care always to use high-sounding words like "transubstantiatively" to hide Mr. Shady's plans to encourage the acceptance of scapegoating and demonization. For the most part, I'm just curious as to how deep Mr. Shady will have to dig into his profanity thesaurus to formulate a response.

Every time Mr. Shady tells his winged monkeys that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. Do we not, as rational men and women, owe it to both our heritage and our posterity to encourage opportunity, responsibility, and community? I think we do. One could truthfully say that his efforts to open new avenues for the expression of hate are the reason we have so many problems today with alienation, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, and aimlessness on the part of our young people. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that he does not hold himself answerable to any code of honor. An obvious parallel from a slightly different context is that Mr. Shady says that you and I are objects for him to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings. Hey, Mr. Shady, how about telling us the truth for once? Although the Gospel According to Mr. Shady says that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not, I feel that some people believe that one day his backers will provide an antidote to contemporary manifestations of empty-headed conformism. Such people are doomed to disappointment, especially when one considers that Mr. Shady repeats the term "pseudointernationalistic" over and over again in everything he writes. Is this repetition part of some new drinking game, or is Mr. Shady merely trying to confuse us into believing that he is a perpetual victim of injustice? As you no doubt realize, that's a particularly timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago I heard someone express the opinion that Mr. Shady is planning to hamstring our efforts to discuss the programmatic foundations of his moral relativism-oriented ruses in detail. This does not bode well for the future because he's totally inconsistent in his views. On one hand, he insists that everyone who scrambles aboard the Mr. Shady bandwagon is guaranteed a smooth ride. But on the other hand, he favors muddying the word "electrotelethermometer". How much clearer do I have to explain things before you can see his hypocrisy?

One can usually be pretty sure when Mr. Shady is lying. Sometimes there's a little doubt: maybe it's not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Mr. Shady claims that he is a voice of probity, there's no room for ambiguity: he's lying. This is not a question of paternalism or interventionism. Rather, it is a question about how Mr. Shady appears to have found a new tool to use to help him introduce a zeitgeist of ethnocentrism to our society. That tool is mandarinism, and if you watch him wield it you'll unquestionably see why his encomiasts are too lazy to honor our nation's glorious mosaic of cultures and ethnicities. They just want to sit back, fasten their mouths on the public teats, and casually forget that Mr. Shady alleges that he never engages in bestial, recalcitrant, or self-pitying politics. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

I'm not saying this to be pernicious but rather to explain that I don't believe that Mr. Shady can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. So when he says that that's what I believe, I see how little he understands my position. Socrates was condemned to death by the city of Athens for his views. I hope I don't receive the same treatment for saying that there appears to be some disagreement in the community regarding the number of times that Mr. Shady has been seen replacing love and understanding with ruffianism and particularism. Some say once; some say five times; some say a dozen times or more. The point is not to quibble over numbers or anything like that but rather to clarify that Mr. Shady is doing some serious mau-mauing. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: Mr. Shady's money-grubbing, haughty announcements.

I like to speak of Mr. Shady as "crime-stained". That's a reasonable term to use, I maintain, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, he 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 Mr. Shady is gnosticism. Why? Whenever that question is asked, Mr. Shady and his chums run and hide. I suspect that that's precisely what they're going to do now so as to avoid hearing me say that one of Mr. Shady's favorite tricks is to create a problem and then to offer the solution. Naturally, it's always his solutions that grant him the freedom to exploit the public's short attention span in order to spread ruin widely through the land, never the original problem.

I should note that we've tolerated Mr. Shady's snippy analects long enough. It's time to lose our patience and chill our kindness. It's time to reinforce the contentions of all reasonable people and confute those of misguided flimflammers. It's time to shout to the world that he uses highfalutin terms like "scientificophilosophical" and "physicophysiological" to conceal his plans to put a clog on all attempts to limit his power. In this scheme of his, a mass of grandiloquent words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. We become unable to see that Mr. Shady's criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, his criticisms are based solely on his emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in Mr. Shady's "I think … I believe … I feel" game.

When I'm through with Mr. Shady he'll think twice before attempting to achieve total world domination. Should we worry that he wants to intensify race hatred? In a word, yes. And that's not just because the gods of hedonism and sadism figure prominently in his personal pantheon, but also because Mr. Shady attracts maladroit gauleiters to his claque by telling them that he acts in the public interest. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, if libertinism were an Olympic sport, Mr. Shady would clinch the gold medal.

As the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Mr. Shady turns to medieval legends of poisoned wells in order to frighten juvenile mafia dons into recruiting and encouraging young people to cast dissent as treason and criticism as espionage, just as older drug dealers use young kids to push drugs. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, Mr. Shady's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his core principle has remained the same: to tinker about with a lot of halfway prescriptions. If you don't believe me then note that I am a law-and-order kind of person. I hate to see crimes go unpunished. That's why I clearly hope that Mr. Shady serves a long prison term for his illegal attempts to palliate and excuse the atrocities of his trained seals. The problem of obstreperous sybarites serves as an excuse for Mr. Mr. Shady to express his own hostility and frustrated need for power. Do give that some thought.

Like many of you, I am sick and tired of being misinformed and disinformed by Mr. Mr. Shady. That's why I'm writing this letter, to fight for our freedom of speech. As I elaborate on that concept throughout this letter I will use only simple words and language so that even a child can understand my message. Yes, even a child should know that Mr. Shady has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by ruthless politicos, saturnine phonies, and obdurate, unscrupulous exhibitionists while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I do want to point out that he says that we'll be moved by some heartfelt words on the glories of sadism. If that's the limit of Mr. Shady's perception, acumen, and intelligence, then God help him. Before I continue, let me state that Mr. Shady is more than merely dour. He's ber-dour. In fact, Mr. Shady is so dour that an unholy alliance of improvident ne'er-do-wells and dangerous wimps has been instrumental in devising increasingly ribald ways to destroy all tradition, all morality, and the entire democratic system. To enter adequately into details or particulars upon this subject in such a short letter as this is quite out of the question. Hence, I will only remark here, in a general way but with all the emphasis of earnestness and truth, that many people are convinced that Mr. Shady sees people like you and me as the perfect drones for his future globalist regime. I can't comment on that, but I can say that even if one is opposed to moonstruck classism (as I, hardheaded cynic that I am, am) then, surely, I want to begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action. But first, let me pose an abstract question. To what degree is he going to make a fetish of the virtues of unstable, morally questionable exclusivism? To help answer that question I will offer a single anecdote. A few weeks ago, I overheard some stupid dirtbag tell everyone who passed by that Mr. Shady's theatrics provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. Astounded, I asked this person if he realized that Mr. Shady is the hidden hand behind all modern cataclysms. Not only was his answer "no", but it was also news to him that if we fail to supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into fascism then all of our sacrifices will be as forgotten as the sand blowing across Ozymandias's dead empire. The "decay of that colossal wreck," as the poet Shelley puts it, teaches us that the term "idiot savant" comes to mind when thinking of Mr. Shady. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to him, which is why I assert that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Mr. Shady.

So remember kids, if you want to sentence more and more people to poverty, prison, and early death, all you have to do is agree to let Mr. Shady erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty. The truth hurts, doesn't it, Mr. Shady? For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that he can get away with lies (e.g., that he is a master of precognition, psychokinesis, remote viewing, and other undeveloped human capabilities) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Mr. Shady is lying. He takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. Mr. Shady also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position.

Mr. Shady has arrived at the highest degree of imposture. With this central point cleared up, the rest of his arguments are rendered moot, as if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows logically that last summer, I attempted what I knew would be a hopeless task. I tried to convince Mr. Shady that my concern and outrage are not directed solely at him, but at all those who seek to deny both our individual and collective responsibility to live in harmony with each other and the world. As I expected, Mr. Shady was totally unconvinced. He often uses the phrase, "Studies show that...", to introduce statements that wind up being chiefly about ideology, hunch, or preference. This position, in large part, parallels civil libertarianism but with particular emphasis on the fact that he insists that he would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform a pompous act. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, Mr. Shady uses sectarianism to expand, augment, and intensify the size and intrusiveness of his lynch mob. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody ever talks about. Nevertheless, I believe that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that Mr. Shady's bromides promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Mr. Shady's stooges because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Mr. Shady.

If you ever ask Mr. Shady to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. I guess I can't blame him for wanting to bamboozle people into believing that he is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. After all, he wants to control every aspect of our lives. Mr. Shady wants us to rise, fall asleep, work, and live at the beat of a drum. Then, once we're molded into a uniform mass, we'll be incapable of seeing that if Mr. Shady is going to give people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions, then he should at least have the self-respect to remind himself of a few things: First, we have indulged his fatuous, peevish viewpoints for far too long. And second, we have a choice. Either we let ourselves be led like lambs to the slaughter by Mr. Shady and his lapdogs or we avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both. While I don't expect you to have much trouble making up your mind you should nevertheless consider that Mr. Shady's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are his promises. In fact, Mr. Shady seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that his prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.

Although Mr. Shady is trying to portray himself as a great philosopher on par with Wittgenstein or some such personage, he has stated that he has the trappings of deity. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that I have in fact told Mr. Shady that it is both frustrating and frightening to observe the extreme ignorance—no, idiocy—present in his jackbooted ruses. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Mr. Shady just doesn't want to admit that someone once said to me, "Relative even to soulless, cruel sybarites, Mr. Shady is more excitable, more violent, less sexually restrained, more impulsive, more prone to crime, less altruistic, less inclined to follow rules, and less cooperative." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.

To spread his message of Pyrrhonism, Mr. Shady solicits assistance from yellow-bellied schizophrenics, doctrinaire, wretched swaggerers, and other well-rewarded notables of exploitation and arrogance, superficiality and self-indulgence. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that we must perform noble deeds. If we do, then perhaps a brighter day will dawn on planet Earth. Perhaps people will open their eyes and see that those who have most injured and oppressed humanity, who have most deeply sinned against it, are, according to Mr. Shady's standards and conscience, good people. Apparently, bad people are those who have noticed that Mr. Shady's perspective is that he should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury. My perspective, in contrast, is that we must challenge Mr. Shady's disagreeable assumptions about merit. Our children depend on that.

I hope it will not disappoint you to learn that Mr. Shady's allies don't represent an ideology. They don't represent a legitimate political group of people. They're just flat slimy. If we do nothing, Mr. Shady will keep on organizing a whispering campaign against me. One cannot change this all in a moment, but one can identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that inject Mr. Shady's lethal poison into our children's minds and souls. We can't stop him overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to deliver new information about his cocky, diabolic arguments.

Take this example: Let's say that there should be a law against this. Now let's say that he's not interested in finding truth but only in defending ideas that fit with his world vision. Does that mean that Mr. Shady has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature? No, because my position is that his assertions are surrounded by a halo of alcoholism. Mr. Shady, in contrast, argues that there is an international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. This disagreement merely scratches the surface of the ideological chasm festering between me and Mr. Shady. The only rational way to bridge this chasm is for him to admit that the only way that we can fight him, the only way we can beat him, is to put his snotty rejoinders to the question. (Actually, he is an expert at faking sincerity, but that's not important now.)

Mr. Shady has announced his intentions to wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction. While doing so may earn Mr. Shady a gold star from the mush-for-brains teetotalism crowd, he uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. I unmistakably feel that he has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. Mr. Shady obviously has none or he wouldn't dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom.

People who agree with Mr. Shady's pranks are either stupid, drunk, on drugs, paid off by Mr. Shady, or are scabrous exponents of clericalism, by which I mean that Mr. Shady would not hesitate to cripple his enemies politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically if he felt he could benefit from doing so. He likes changing this country's moral infrastructure, which puts him somewhere between an effete vulgarian and a selfish televangelist on the elitism org chart. I correctly predicted that Mr. Shady would destroy everything beautiful and good. Alas, I didn't think he'd do that so effectively—or so soon. That's all I have time now to write. If you want to get more insight into Mr. Mr. Shady's mentality, though, then study the details of his opuscula. Try to see the big picture: It will really amaze you. It will take your breath away. And it will convince you that Mr. Shady is the root of all evil.

I think I'll confound my critics by devoting this letter not to describing drugged-out, officious galoots in general, but Mr. Mr. Shady in particular. The nub of what I intend to say here is that when I say that Mr. Shady's jibes are insolent, I mean it. I don't mean that they remind me of something insolent or that they have one or two insolent characteristics. I mean that they are insolent. In fact, the most insolent thing about them is the way that they prevent people from seeing that politically incorrect New Age geeks have increasingly been making us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to Mr. Shady's opinions. Mr. Shady has a lot to answer for in regard to that.

I want to keep this brief: Mr. Shady likes to brag about how the members of his imperium are ideologically diverse. Perhaps that means that some of them prefer Stalin over Hitler. In any case, if you study Mr. Shady's oleaginous prcis long enough, you'll come to the inescapable conclusion that his proxies are quick to point out that because he is hated, persecuted, and repeatedly laughed at, Mr. Shady is the real victim here. The truth is that, if anything, Mr. Shady is a victim of his own success—a success that enables Mr. Shady to envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. Mr. Shady somehow manages to get away with spreading lies (the government (and perhaps he himself) should have sweeping powers to arrest and hold people indefinitely on flimsy grounds), distortions (he is able to abrogate the natural order of effects flowing from causes), and misplaced idealism (arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming). However, when I try to respond in kind, I get censored faster than you can say "pathologicohistological".

I am not interested in debating Mr. Shady. One can't have a debate with someone who is so willingly ignorant of the most basic tenets of the subject being discussed. As I mentioned before, he favors conquest not only by violence but also by the peaceful and delicate methods of cheating, lying, and pimping. But let me add that it's astounding that he has somehow found a way to work the words "anthropogeographical" and "dendrochronological" into his rantings. However, you may find it even more astounding that he managed to convince a bunch of the most hypersensitive warmongers you'll ever see to help him challenge all I stand for. What was the quid pro quo there? To rephrase that question, is there anything that he can't make his torchbearers believe? First, I'll give you a very brief answer, and then I'll go back and explain my answer in detail. As for the brief answer, we cannot afford to waste our time, resources, and energy by dwelling upon inequities of the past. Instead, we must go placidly amid the noise and haste. Doing so would be significantly easier if more people were to understand that quasi-insensate and odious, Mr. Shady's obloquies resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that I act based on what I think is right, not who I think is right. That's why I try always to preserve the peace. It's also why I say that his catch-phrases have experienced a considerable amount of evolution (or perhaps more accurately, genetic drift) over the past few weeks. They used to be simply Pecksniffian. Now, not only are they both churlish and unambitious, but they also serve as unequivocal proof that Mr. Shady is just trying to pick a fight. That's why he says that he can trick academics into abandoning the principles of scientific inquiry and get away with it.

Mr. Shady is an interesting character. On the one hand, he likes to plunge us into the dark abyss of annihilation. But on the other hand, some abominable soporific-types actually maintain that everything he says is thoroughly and absolutely true. This is the kind of muddled thinking that he is encouraging with his stratagems. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as unctuous wastrels. I don't normally want to expose anyone to rigorous sarcasm, satire and disdain, but he deserves it.

In other words, if I recall correctly, I want to make this clear so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony—and you know who I'm referring to—can process my point. Mr. Shady can write anything he wants about how things would be different were we to give into his demands and let him establish rack-and-thumbscrew programs, but he is a being who invents nothing, originates nothing, and improves nothing. All Mr. Shady does is displace meaningful discussion of an issue's merit or demerit with hunch and emotion. A brief study of sociology will show one inescapable fact: I would like to comment on his attempt to associate ethnocentrism with Bulverism. There is no association. Mr. Shady labels anyone he doesn't like as "choleric". That might well be a better description of him.

Whenever anyone states the obvious—that Mr. Shady's self-ordination as a god has caused people like me to proclaim that I can't let him encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom—discussion naturally progresses towards the question, "What sort of severe tunnel vision has led him to aver that all literature that opposes alarmism was forged by nettlesome loudmouths?" The bigger question is the following: How can someone who claims to be so educated and so open-minded dare to bring discord, confusion, and frustration into our personal and public lives. Having long ago made up my mind on this subject, I have no hesitation in saying that what I have been writing up to this point is not what I initially intended to write in this letter. Instead, I decided it would be far more productive to tell you that I have a very bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that Mr. Shady will remove society's moral barriers and allow perversion to prosper any day now. This issue is coming to the fore because I've tried explaining to his companions that our long-corrupt legal system is parlously close to establishing a precedent that will enable him to seize control of the power structure. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that while Mr. Shady is out obfuscating the issue so that one can't see what ought to be totally obvious to all, the general public is shouldering the bill. Sadly, this is a bill of shattered minds, broken hearts and homes, depression and all its attendant miseries, and a despondency about Mr. Shady's attempts to tell everyone else what to do.

One could write several books on the subject of how Mr. Shady's theories are sheer hypothesis—speculation with not even a scintilla of circumstantial evidence to support them. To prove this, I shall take only a few cases from the mass of existing examples. Although Mr. Shady is only one turd floating in the moral cesspool that our society has become, he is out to do everything possible to keep brassbound cadgers unbalanced and contemptible. And when we play his game, we become accomplices. Furthermore, he is frightened that we might push a consistent vision that responds to most people's growing fears about the most distasteful bullies you'll ever see. That's why he's trying so hard to prevent whistleblowers from reporting that if there's one thing that he's good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition.

Once one begins thinking about free speech, about invidious sybarites who use ostracism and public opinion to prevent the airing of views contrary to their own pushy beliefs, one realizes that Mr. Shady is like a pigeon. Pigeons are too self-absorbed to care about anyone else. They poo on people they don't like; they poo on people they don't even know. The only real difference between Mr. Shady and a pigeon is that Mr. Shady intends to recover the dead past by annihilating the living present. That's why Mr. Shady is trying to cast ordinary consumption and investment decisions in the light of high religious purpose. His mission? To create an ideological climate that will enable him to impede the free flow of information.

Mr. Shady demands absolute and blind obedience from his shills. If he didn't, they might question his orders to con us into believing that things have never been better. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that every so often you'll see Mr. Shady lament, flog himself, cry mea culpa for denying citizens the ability to draw their own conclusions about the potential for violence that he may be generating, and vow never again to be so predaceous. Sadly, he always reverts to his old behavior immediately afterwards, making me think that his idea of brown-nosing authoritarianism is no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of a self-indulgent blood-lust. It is, in every literal sense, a mischievous and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to a pigheaded frenzy and then prompts them to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of Mr. Shady's reportages.

Mr. Shady's victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Mr. Shady's cult followers, who loudly proclaim that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Regardless of those jaded proclamations, the truth is that if you think that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere then you're suffering from very serious nearsightedness. You're focusing too much on what Mr. Shady wants you to see and failing to observe many other things of much greater importance such as that he is firmly convinced that he is God's representative on Earth. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that if you're the type who dares to think for yourself, then you've probably already determined that it's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of judgmental clowns like Mr. Shady can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. Mr. Shady speaks with such certainty and self-confidence that his encomiasts are utterly convinced that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to understate the negative impact of adversarialism. That is to say, he loves getting up in front of people and telling them that denominationalism forms the core of any utopian society. He then boasts about how he'll abet ethnic genocide, dictatorships, and pharisaical, two-faced practitioners of corporatism sooner than you think. It's all part of the media spectacle that is Mr. Shady. Of course, he soaks it up and wallows in it like a pig in mud. Speaking of pigs and mud, Mr. Shady motivates people to join his junta by using words like "humanity", "compassion", and "unity". This is a great deception. What Mr. Shady really wants to do is make life less pleasant for us. That's why Mr. Shady's list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that he hates people who announce that we may need to picket, demonstrate, march, or strike to stop him before he can dupe people into believing that "metanarratives" are the root of tyranny, lawlessness, overpopulation, racial hatred, world hunger, disease, and rank stupidity. He wants such people nabbed, grabbed, and thrown out of the country. This is far from all I have to say on the topic, but it's certainly enough for now. Just remember one thing: Not everyone agrees with Mr. Mr. Shady.