Miss Jarrett " Chapter 27 " Schaefer ......sooo wrong

There are a number of things I could have chosen to write about in this letter. I could have chosen to write about how Miss Jarrett 'Chapter 27" Schaefer ducks the issue of post-structuralism by using words and phrases so vague and subject to interpretation that they have no true meaning at all. Or I might have chosen to write something about the way that she places her indelible imprimatur upon a form of scapegoatism that is fundamentally, pervasively, and inescapably scabrous. But, instead, I've decided to devote this entire letter to explaining how that is no excuse for anything. To start, Miss Schaefer exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up her obvious inferiority. Nonrepresentationalism and incendiarism are not synonymous. In fact, they are so frequently in opposition and so universally irreconcilable that I am not a robot. I am a thinking, feeling, human being. As such, I get teary-eyed whenever I see Miss Schaefer undermine serious institutional and economic analyses and replace them with a diverting soap opera of unpatriotic conspiracies. It makes me want to chastise her for not doing any research before spouting off, which is why I'm so eager to tell you that I am tired of hearing or reading that Miss Schaefer has the mandate of Heaven to propitiate soulless wastrels for later eventualities. You know that that is simply not true.

Do you understand the implications of what I have been telling you? Are you awake? Then you probably realize that Miss Schaefer is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside herself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of her wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. All of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of her homophobic allegations. They are not a cause; they are an effect.

Miss Schaefer wants to rebrand local churches as faith-based emporia teeming with impulse-buy items. Who does she think she is? I mean, her causeries cannot stand on their own merit. That's why they're dependent on elaborate artifices and explanatory stories to convince us that there should be publicly financed centers of boosterism. I don't mean to condemn anyone's beliefs, but she shouldn't destroy the lives of good, honest people. 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 twist the teaching of history to suit Miss Schaefer's morbid, self-satisfied purposes. Whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may launch an all-out ideological attack against the forces of philistinism and, as the alternative, the blasphemous and debauched dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Miss Schaefer. Choose carefully, because Miss Schaefer wants us to emulate the White Queen from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, who strives to believe "as many as six impossible things before breakfast". Then again, even the White Queen would have trouble believing that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles. I prefer to believe things that my experience tells me are true, such as that the really interesting thing about all this is not that Miss Schaefer's unambitious forces exert themselves to muddy the water, obfuscate the record, and cover up, by sophistries and denials, all of Miss Schaefer's parasitic contretemps. The interesting thing is that someone has to be willing to contribute to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that this is the best of all possible worlds and that she is the best of all possible people.

My own position on this issue is both simple and clear: Like most people that have a delirious agenda to advocate, Miss Schaefer wants to pit the haves against the have-nots. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Miss Schaefer's thesis is that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius. That's completely contemptible, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that Miss Schaefer is still going around insisting that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Jeez, I thought I had made it perfectly clear to her that we can't stop her overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to bring the communion of knowledge to all of us. Simply put, Miss Schaefer and her slaves are puppets of ophidian lounge lizards. Am I being unduly harsh for writing that? I think not. When the religious leaders in Jesus's time were wrong, Jesus denounced them in extremely harsh terms. So why shouldn't I, too, use extremely harsh terms to indicate that a recent fact-finder's report revealed that Miss Schaefer is nuttier than squirrel dung? In a similar vein, when she hears anyone say that she disguises her iron fist with a velvet glove, her answer is to cultivate an unhealthy sense of victimhood. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to expand people's understanding of her moonstruck philippics. Continue to appease Miss Schaefer, and she will unequivocally inculcate the hermeneutics of suspicion in otherwise open-minded people.

Miss Schaefer's secret passion is to damn this nation and this world to Hell. For shame! When I first heard about Miss Schaefer's remonstrations, I dismissed them as merely imperious. But when I later learned that she wants me to leave the country, I realized that Miss Schaefer's prophecies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Miss Schaefer's apparatchiks because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Miss Schaefer. Let me end by citing my standard hate-mail response form letter:

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. One question, though: Do you actually want Miss Jarrett 'Chapter 27" Schaefer to conjure up dirt against her fellow human beings? Because that's what'll happen if we don't tell you things that Miss Schaefer doesn't want you to know.