Cleverly hidden within this post, 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 amoral as to convince the reader that most of what Romney says is pure gibberish. Let me begin by citing a range of examples from the public sphere. For starters, Romney claims to be fighting for equality. What he's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that in my observations upon vigilantism, 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 we need to bring fresh leadership and even-handed tolerance to the present controversy. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything.
Romney likes to imply that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. This is what his opinions amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of lackadaisical drivel devised by his advocates and mindlessly multiplied by noisome wankers of one sort or another. According to him, most people believe that sinful deviants are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. Really? Does Romney have some sort of mind-reading ability or did he get his information from a less reliable source? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history but to all human culture.
From secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Romney's dupes have always found a way to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. Romney always cavils at my attempts to rise to the challenge of thwarting his unambitious plans. That's probably because the very genesis of Romney's yawping press releases is in favoritism. And it seems to me to be a neat bit of historic justice that he will eventually himself be destroyed by favoritism.
Romney makes a lot of long statements that mean practically nothing. What's sneaky is that he constructs those statements in such a way that it never occurs to his readers to analyze them. Analysis would almost certainly indicate that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about Romney's treacherous behavior but about the way that it is immature and stupid of Romney to declare a national emergency, round up everyone who disagrees with him, and put them in concentration camps. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to change the world for the better, and that's why I say that he maintains that cruel carpers are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. While that happens to be pure fantasy from the world of make-believe, one important fact to consider is that his argument that once he has approved of something it can't possibly be tasteless is hopelessly flawed and entirely circuitous.
No one can claim to know the specific source of Romney's squibs, but it wasn't so long ago that people like you and me were free to establish beyond a shred of doubt that Romney behaves like an eternal student at a vast, distasteful campus where everyone is taught that two wrongs make a right. Recently, that's become a lot harder to do. What happened that changed things so much? To put it briefly, Romney happened. By fixing blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides a simplistic explanation, Romney has managed to sidetrack us so we can't make this world a better place in which to live. If I am correctly informed, his hangers-on work behind the scenes to embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. In any case, ignorance is bliss. This may be why his apple-polishers are generally all smiles. Okay, have you had enough of this post? Good. Let's end it by reiterating that letting Romney encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance is tantamount to cutting your own wrist with a razor blade.
Romney likes to imply that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. This is what his opinions amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of lackadaisical drivel devised by his advocates and mindlessly multiplied by noisome wankers of one sort or another. According to him, most people believe that sinful deviants are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. Really? Does Romney have some sort of mind-reading ability or did he get his information from a less reliable source? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history but to all human culture.
From secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Romney's dupes have always found a way to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. Romney always cavils at my attempts to rise to the challenge of thwarting his unambitious plans. That's probably because the very genesis of Romney's yawping press releases is in favoritism. And it seems to me to be a neat bit of historic justice that he will eventually himself be destroyed by favoritism.
Romney makes a lot of long statements that mean practically nothing. What's sneaky is that he constructs those statements in such a way that it never occurs to his readers to analyze them. Analysis would almost certainly indicate that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about Romney's treacherous behavior but about the way that it is immature and stupid of Romney to declare a national emergency, round up everyone who disagrees with him, and put them in concentration camps. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to change the world for the better, and that's why I say that he maintains that cruel carpers are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. While that happens to be pure fantasy from the world of make-believe, one important fact to consider is that his argument that once he has approved of something it can't possibly be tasteless is hopelessly flawed and entirely circuitous.
No one can claim to know the specific source of Romney's squibs, but it wasn't so long ago that people like you and me were free to establish beyond a shred of doubt that Romney behaves like an eternal student at a vast, distasteful campus where everyone is taught that two wrongs make a right. Recently, that's become a lot harder to do. What happened that changed things so much? To put it briefly, Romney happened. By fixing blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides a simplistic explanation, Romney has managed to sidetrack us so we can't make this world a better place in which to live. If I am correctly informed, his hangers-on work behind the scenes to embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. In any case, ignorance is bliss. This may be why his apple-polishers are generally all smiles. Okay, have you had enough of this post? Good. Let's end it by reiterating that letting Romney encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance is tantamount to cutting your own wrist with a razor blade.
