A Description of a Really Nice Sausage
George Will writes
about liberal campuses, and Leiter replies
, satisfyingly, but less than elegantly. So here I am.
The following diagram shows what should be intuitively obvious in any given political society:
Political opinions range from liberal to conservative, although most people bunch up right in the middle. The political line is drawn to roughly split the population in half—sort of grading politics on the curve. Okay.
is how America looks. For a variety of reasons, America's political spectrum is skewed to the right. Where most of the industrialized world considers the drawing line between Conservatism and Liberalism is firmly in the field of the Democratic Party. In fact, it borders on being a fringe belief.
The reason I've done this is to illustrate something straight out of Stephen J. Gould. Academia fosters diversity of opinion—this is true. But it so happens that the broadest area of ideological space is situated to the left
of the American dividing line, because the American dividing line is so far right to begin with. There's a lot more room on the left for different ideas to thrive. Whereas, you can't really keep going right unless you want to be a fascist.
So there should be no surprise at the abundance of leftist opinions in Academia—it's like an ecological sorting, with more room in the fitness landscape
on the "wrong" side, from Mr. Will's point of view, than the "right."
Of course, Evolution is a subject this country doesn't like to deal with, another consequence of the righward shift.…
that the people are stupid
meme is trite. Trite like seeing a guy getting kicked in the balls is trite. Parse that all by yourselves.
But like I mean if you're one of the elite who is not stupid, than evidence to the contrary is your finding profundity or novelty in the observation that those who are not, are. You should realize this already. It's like a black guy saying, "These non-black people are white!
" At least, in a suitably third- or fourth-race-deficient country.
Moreover, as stupid people undoubtedly outnumber smart people by orders of magnitude, a productive attitude is less supercilious and more accommodating. Less overtly supercilious, more superficially accommodating. It's like, you live with penguins, you eat raw fish.
And but the majority of stupid people is not just a demographic fact of the moment; it's virtually guaranteed by a number of generic and universally-applicable scientific principles. First, that of normal distributions. Second, by Murphy's Law of Civilizations. And lastly, because the abundance of evidence in hand demonstrates God to be analogous to a baked sixteen year-old playing The Sims
by removing all doors from a small house and slowly watching his avatar starve and piss himself to death.
I tell you what else I've come to loathe—
Anti-intellectualism. Sure, the danger is elitism, alienating the demos
, yeah, whatever, okay, but votes aren't going to get you a solvent social security. The state of Texas as red as a baboon's ass isn't going to deliver a safe trip to Mars, despite the common chromophilicity. Ideas will, and smart people with ideas, and conversations between people who have ideas and don't mind having theirs challenged or expanded upon.
No virtue in talking small, or simply, unless you want the country to revert to a Jeffersonian farmer-state. It'd be hard to maintain aircraft carriers as a nation of farmers.
Fuckin' Alma redemptoris.
What's up with C-SPAN lately?
Outside legislative business, all it seems to be anymore is American Enterprise Institute this, Cato that, Apple-Pie Brigade thusly.
I'm not going to engage in criticizing the media, because that's like panning Gucci this season in favor of Armani, and I just don't have the strength to be that silly. But still.
It's like I'm starting to fetishize this guy.
More from Derbyshire:
Possibly as a result of having grown up in the lower classes of provincial England, I detest snobbery. I mean, I really, viscerally, loathe it.
Entirely as a result of having grown up in a secular (though God-believing) family, and having been exposed to ideas outside the proscriptions of pulpiteers, I detest overt, proselytizing religiosity. Not just viscerally hate it, but if I were somehow sublimed into a principle, I believe I would be anathema
There is nothing more snobbish than pretending to a uniquely true interpretation of the beginning, fate, and purpose of the universe, and to position yourself as the divine conduit through which such interpretations are pumped. At least in Iraq they've got the idea of blowing up pipelines. And the most monstrous children of snobbery and politics are born from religious conservatives who will cradle them in the most obscene chapters of scripture.
A government founded on Jesus would be one thing—probably an improvement. But if you're hearkening unto Ezekiel, Exodus, and Leviticus, you're reading the wrong fucking books, man.
NEXT TIME ON THE SCRIP:
A long-winded scholarly article on biblical exegesis, cooking tips for Thanksgiving, and Diploblastic Embryos for Bush.
Let's get one thing straight:
Not a big fan of Clinton the President. The man actually founded an organization to move the Democratic Party centrally. Like now we're all going to debate whether to give flag burners the death penalty or merely life in prison?
The healthcare thing failed. Opposition in Somalia sent him packing, plus Rwanda happened. Economy was fantastic, but we're talking things like
- Internet boom.
- Historical trend in increasing productivity carried over from the 80s.
- Irrational exuberance.
- Other economical-sounding things I haven't had the time to explore or make up whole-cloth.
Plus a number of silly measures escaped out from under him like a jambalaya fart: Communications Decency Act and Digital Milennium Copyright Act to name a few. Freakin' police sobriety-checkpoints along the Information Superhighway.
But: two SCOTUS judges, plus tougher environmental standards, plus getting uptight conservatives in Congress to give up cigars.
From the National Review's John Derbyshire
Invited to choose between a president who is (a) a patriotic family man of character and ability who believes the universe was created on a Friday afternoon in 4,004 B.C. with all biological species instantly represented, or (b) an amoral hedonist and philanderer who “loathes the military” but who believes in the evolution of species via natural selection across hundreds of millions of years, which would I choose? Are you kidding?
No one's kidding here. I'd be inclined myself to choose (a), as family men of character and ability are not only rare in the landscape of politics, but are likely at this time to be actively selected against.
But let's not be too hasty—I'm thinking there are a couple of leaders whose attitudes toward the military, had they gone more toward loathing
, would have benefitted not only America but several other empires, nations, principalities, duchies grand and lite, plus a city-state or two.
More chordally, I think we have to wonder just which hypothetical choice Mr. Derbyshire is here pondering. For while there are superficial similarities to a couple of recent presidents here and abroad, esp. if one is prone to allow personal political affiliations to interfere with his or her view of reality, no such contest has taken place in the world.
Moreover if it had and, say, 48% of the electorate had gone and supported (b), I think I would be mighty upset. Stupendously so. Even if I wished that (a) had had a little more science education and were a bit less beholden to Conservative religious interests.
However—no, let's just look at a recent example, shall we? Because I want to point out that Derbyshire's hypothetical, although parable-like, if not completely parabolic (at least—some kind of -bolic
), is naïve of real political experience. Which is, in a review
of the Nation
, the marrow we're digging at, correct?
So let's compare the 43rd and 42nd presidents, as they are the most recent. William Jefferson Clinton is a family man. So is George W. Bush. Both are patriotic. WJC suffers in the character department because of what's likely a sequence of extramarital affairs, at least one conducted while president. At the same time, GWB suffers in the ability department as a result of having never had to work very hard to get anywhere—and, once gotten there, promptly getting booted out until recently.
So like so far there's no obvious choice. Certainly no "Are you kidding?" (AYK) choice. So but let's dig deeper, as Derbyshire is fond of doing.
Fondness for the military is a hard thing to measure, as analogously there are people who accept the existence of guns as protective measures, and then there are people with walk-in gun safes. Apropos 42 and 43, both avoided Vietnam. WJC by plane, moving to Canada. GWB by train and automobile, effectively skipping out on much of the last part of his improbably-obtained Air National Guard duty. But in darkness of Vietnam (I'm loathe to say in light of
), I can hardly blame either for their efforts. Forty-two used his military often in foreign interventions. Forty-three only twice, so far, but what
a pair of interventions! So they like tie there, too.
TO BE CONTINUED....
Usually I reserve a special kind of contempt
for people who claim possession of the capital-T TRUTH and preach denigration of all heterodox positions, and that's still a useful position to take in most situations, in most places, with most nefarious truth-claiming characters—but you know what? America denies evolution's role
in the development of complex life, and she is wrong. Contemptuously, madly, utterly and completely wrong.
And let me go a little easier on myself, while masochism is still legal: I, nor any evolutionary biologist, nor any biologist
for that matter, cannot and will not claim special knowledge. We have what scientists have wrought for the past century and a half: careful observation and theory, applied consistently to the evidence. Undoubtedly, there are many particulars which are currently misunderstood, or just plain wrong. But that evolution has occurred is a fact
So now, America—learn to deal with it.
Are economists stupid?
The Angry Economist asks
in a pretty snarky way why our legislative bodies create conditions which limit choices for people in exchange for providing what is at least thought
to a be a public good. He touches on building codes, minimum wage, and compulsory and publicly-funded education.
Sometimes I like to pretend I'm being as little disingenuous as possible, and this is one of those dress-up moments—but all the same, I recommend actually reading his blog entry, and some of his others, rather than relyin on my description. Boy, is that guy angry.
My feeling, as a non-economist and part-time poor person, is that the litany of public policies complained about are more about setting reasonable extremes of last resort than restricting choice, although by nature these and any non-trivial law will result in some phase-space of potential human choice ablated.
Objecting to building codes on the grounds that they restrict the choices of the poor is ludicrous. Back in my hometown of —&mdash&;mdash;, we had a similar incident where some of us in the town thought that perhaps the central square's commemorative pungee pits ought to have some sort of wall or fence around them, or at least that we should break up the sidewalks that led directly into
them. Our idea was, people are generally not going to want to walk into the pungee pits. The other political contingent in town argued that our measures treated people as idiots and that the pits were fine as-was.
Well, it happened that for awhile, because of the stalemate, nothing happened to the commemorative pungee pits, and one morning we found Jakob Crylhamar, a vocal crotchet on the other side of the aisle, buried up to his chest in pungee stick. I believe his last words as we tried to wrench him out were, "I meant
to do that." But still, I don't believe him. I guess I'm a skeptic at heart.
I emphasize: I'm not an economist, although economists and I share wonk- and assholery in common, so what I've said is most likley economically irrelevant. Asshole-wise, however, it's as informative as hell.
What the hell is the matter with you people anyway?
Like nuclear waste from Yucca Mountain, regionalism and secessionism has creeped from the fissures of what we long ago thought was its secure tomb to cloud the whole country with a foul miasma. A miasma
is what pre-germ theory thinkers considered a noxious cloud that infected people with disease.
Lefties have been joking about joining Canada. Righties have joked about booting the blue states. What the hell is this all about? In a few years we're all going to be Muslim, anyway.
Look, we got a good thing going. Over two hundred years, one constitution. One little hiccup along the way—but we ended up trading a Republican
for Savannah and three amendments and a Ku Klux Klan later, everything was money. Sort of.
But like when I was a kid and we played at the basketball court, the two teams, nominally friends, were of course a bit vicious to each other on the court. Rough picks, flying elbows, a pot of yo' mamma jokes
so deep we with our little arms couldn't hope to scrape the bottom. And occasionally things were heated enough to prompt some little shit to threaten to take "his" ball and go home. I still don't know whose fucking ball that was.
But listen: we would then all, even his teammates, threaten to beat the shit out of him if he pussied out like that, and one of two things would happen. A) he would give in and we'd go on playing, or B) he'd still leave, we'd steal the ball from his drunk dad's negligently-unlocked shed, and then kick the shit out of him before the next basketball game.
So it's simple people, really. We're playing basketball. We love it. It's tiring, but it's rewarding, even when some bully pulls down the net. So if someone tries to puss out with the ball, you just gang up on him and make sure we keep playing. 'Cause otherwise, it's go inside, take a bath, and do your homework.
, people—do you really know what's at stake here?
A Conservative colleague of mine has asked to respond to the previous post in a way more fully realized than in a comment. As the Scrip
has nothing else either intelligent, incoherent, or spiteful to say today, the following is his reply.
Okay ha-ha. But I'll tell you what--you liberals make fun of some things that we conservatives actually do hold very close to heart. For instance, when in Commandment 12 you slyly reference our President's saying a couple of days ago, that he would reach out to all who shared our goals. Of course, in teh context of this post, it's supposed to say that Conservatives aren't really all that Christian and that we neglect other people to serve our own ends.
But what many liberals don't realize is what it means to be a Christian. I don't think many liberals who think they are Christians really even are. I'm not trying to insult anybody but it's just that I think you can't be a real Christian and be a liberal today. Abortion's just one small part o fit. Liberals don't have moral values like we Conservatives do. And so you know what? We Conservatives are just doing A) what progressives have done for decades, and B) extending our hand to thsoe on the wrong side who want to be saved.
I mean look, Christians will try all their mite to help a heathen find Christ, and in that context may feed him, clothe him, look after him, and so on. To those who want to find Christ, who just can't find the way, we Christians are there as a light--not even a light, really, but a mirror--a big shiny mirror so that Christ's light can find them and they can come out of the wilderness.
But for those who aren't just not looking for Christ, but who don't care to even bother acknowledging Him, or who deny Him, much as it breaks our hearts inside to know they are Hellbound, it's just not fair to those we can help to extend them kindness and resources too. They're not comin over, they don't want to be saved, and so if we can't help their heavenly souls, how can we hypacritically help their fragile mortal bodies? Christ Himself would not have condoned it.
This carries over to politics. For decades we have been suppressed, had our God forced from public life, stripped from courthouses, the moral foundation of this country tattered to shreds, and now finally we have a chance to rectify all of that. Not just for us, understand, but for God. If it were just for us, it would be meaningless, no one would care, everyone would just kill and rape and pilalge every one else and it would be anarchy. But God watches over us, and its for Him that we are now transforming our country. And so now, when we have worked so hard to get to the point where we can roll back the evils of liberals, would we say to the losing side, "Hey come on board, let's work together to maintain the status quo!" Of course we wouldn't. We can't. If we were weak and just humans left ehre on Earth without an Intelligence, like Darwin said, we might. But we are conscious of our duty toward God and so we can't. We won't. I know it sounds a lot like we're trying to exclude people from the process but they just don't realize what we're doing, and why we have to do it, and so for the sake of God and teh project we're bound on, we have to do it regardless. We would have done it without electoral victory, if we could've, but this is much tidier.
I'm going off I know but I'll just say a few more things if I can. I'll overlook the embryos thing because it just gets ugly but you guys know you have to KNOW that embryos are people. I mean, what do they become? Would you kill retards too, because they're not HUMAN enough? I mean come on.
The thing about homosexuals too. We don't hate homosexuals. We remember that you must hate the sin and not he sinner. But like I said above we can't compromise and give in politically and give these sinners any sign that we might condone their sin, because then we'd be like Sodom and Gomorrah. We just hate how so many people think that loving people and accepting them means that you have to accept their sins and the consequences of them, too. This is what I mean about how a lot of liberals who think their Christians aren't really. If you want to accept a fag and love him then you must help him stop sinning and bring him to Christ. Ideally, anyway. But if he won't come to Christ and he revels in his sin, why then it's nothing we Christians can do to stop him--it IS a free country, after all--but we're not about to let him make sin the status quo here. No sirree bob. And I'm sorry if that seems "exclusionary" or "politically incorrect" to liberals but that's the way it is. Homosexuals are unrepentant sinners.
The last thing I want to say is about Commandment 7, cuz a lot of liberals seem to think that Bush is dumb, when he's not. He is so smart. This thing "insight" you say in that commandment is really more of like liberal code for "smarty-pants." And I don't want to say that smarty-pantses aren't good people, they can be. Everyone's a sinner in God's eyes, and we all have faults, and smarty-pantses can be otherwise good people with Christ in they're hearts except they're not really humble, in their minds, before God. I know lots of smarty-pants. When they're just making puns and jokes and quipping that's fine; sometimes I don't understand them, (especially my colleague with this blog), but I get along with them all right.
But some smarty-pants try and play smarty-pants with language and morals and God, and we just can't allow that. Either you're with us or against us. For abortion or not. For gay marriage or not. It astounds me, and I think most of us true Christians, how eager you liberals are whenever theres some controversy, to figure out where some middle ground is. It's like you're favourite color is grey. Why is that you do that? I mean, and this just might be a mistake on our part, but it seems like that's what you focus on, not whether something is Right or Wrong, Godly or satanic, but how many hairs you can split. And Kerry, for instance, was a master hair-splitter. Against abortion, but pro-choice? How in heck can you be that? How can you go to Vietnam and fight you heart out for this country, then come back and talk against the people fighting it? These look like flip-flops to us. You guys call it "insight," to make it sound impressive and good, but I think it's just giving your word, which is the strongest, most important thing you can give as a person and a sinner on this world, and then gonig back on it.
George W. Bush says what he's going to do and he does it. And he knows that in his heart it's not his poor sinner's intuition making these decisions, because a sinner's intuition is no better than Adam's, and look where that got us. He knows that the big decisions, the right decisions, are made by God, and he is the vehicle for them. And he tells us so. Kerry would have used his Adam's intuition and we would have been worse off for it, whether or not it seems good for us now. That's why we true Christian Conservatives didn't vote for Kerry--even though it seemed to our poor fallen ears that he had a better plan for all of us, we couldn't let ourselves be tempted again, when we knew the voice fo God was in George W. Bush. Might it've been in Kerry eventually? Maybe. I don't like to think that any person is permanently out of reach of salvation, even a catholic. But I didn't want to coutn onthat happening when George W. Bush, the obvious moral leader, was right there on the ballot above him.
But I've gone on long enough. I don't want to wear out my colleague's blog-thing. But anyway I hope I've made a few points about why we true Christian Conservatives chose the candidates we did, and why we're going to act the way we're going to act in the next few years. You see, cause I know many of you liberals mean well, and I'm sorry that you're on the wrong side and I know your going to be very flustered and confused inthe next couple of years and even thouh I don't think I can convince you or even get you to understand fully what's happened, like I said I don't think anyone's out of touch with God so much that they can't be Saved, so I had to at least make this effort to tell you why.
Thanks, and God Bless,
As the Decalogue
delivered by Moshe was superseded by the Twofold Commandment of Love delivered by Christ, we have entered a new era spoken of in Revelation
, and these shall be the rules we live by:
- Thou shalt not aide thy fellow man.
- Thou shalt revel in righteous moral certainty.
- Thou shalt hate homosexuals.
- Protect thee embryos from harm, for yea I say unto you cellular blastocysts are the same as a man.
- Remember thou art anointed.
- Know that the LORD helps those who invoke HIS might continuously.
- Thy leaders shall all be simple; for the LORD abhors insight.
- The LORD thy God forgives sins in HIS name.
- Thou shalt demean liberal traitors with all thy heart.
- Thou shalt fear the LORD's wrath at every second; for HIS indignation at your country may rain down terror upon innocent civilians.
- Thou shalt be an obedient soldier unto the LORD.
- Thou shalt extend thy hand only to those good people who share thy and thy LORD's goals.
- Thou shalt neglect they self-interest, for the LORD's way is hard.
says that Conservatives now with a solid majority and a play-along president should "stop pandering to moderates." One wonders, though—screw this, I
wonder, can a decades-long anti-progressive hegemony really come to pass now that we are all reflectively, agonizingly aware of the historic moment? Does shit like this happen if you know
it's going to happen? Did people notice what was going on with the New Deal?
Granted, it's probably not even entirely accurate to say that since the New Deal we've had a unanimously progressive society. For one thing, progressivism predates FDR. For another, as shocked as I am about the sudden power-grab, these tendencies have been coming—the revolution, if that's what it is, began in the eighties. Abstinence-only, indeed.
Abstention is, in my considered intellectual opinion, for pussies.
Appointment in Fallujah.
An American soldier lined up for presidential inspection stood forthright. He was to be shipped to Iraq the next day, along with his unit. As the President walked the line, shaking hands, thanking the men, the soldier looked out into the crowd and saw Death. Death waved to him.
The soldier instantly grew pale. The President, coming to him, asked the matter. "Mr. President, I just saw Death, and he waved to me," he said.
"Have no worries, son," the President replied, "We'll get you to Iraq to fight for freedom, away from Death here in America." And with that and a silly grin, the President moved on.
The unit was shipped to Iraq that night on Presidential orders. They were going to strike the insurgency in Fallujah. Soon after, Death called on the President in the Oval Office.
"Hey, how's it goin' Darkie?" the President asked. "Say, why did you wave to that poor boy earlier? He was from a Red State."
"I apologize, Mr. President," Death answered, fixing a drink. "But it's just that I was so surprised to see him. You see, I have an appointment with him next week in Fallujah."
Guerre de culture.
Red State Country Music: Toby Keith.
Blue State Country Music: Loretta Lynn.
I generally despise country music, but as I'm starting to find out, that's much a result of being exposed to jingo Nashville country-pop and putrid rockabilly coprophagiosity. After Cash's death last year, I warmed up to the Man in Black. A huge corpus, a lot of feeling and genuineness in the music.
Lynn I've discovered from her latest Jack White-produced album, Van Lear Rose
, which is simply spectacular. If more Kentuckians loved Lynn, it would have gone blue—this is country music in service of more than asinine, neopatriotic anthems.
Even Dolly Parton, I can stand now, although I understand she likes to characterize her music as bluegrass rather than country, which who can blame her. Roots from Appalachian country. Real people, real songs.
As for Toby Keith: he's a person. I understand he likes pickup trucks.
God bless our Once and Future President! Through determination, faith, and certainty in our outnumbering of the slimy, godless liberals, we good American Christians have struck a resounding victory for our Country and Her Lord, Jesus Christ! Now all good people—
. I can't even to make fun of 'em right now.
On behalf of 48% of the country, I would like to make it clear to both our president, George W. Bush, and his constituency, that Tuesday was not
a mandate for his policies.
Admittedly, I cannot definitively say what a mandate is. It is not, however, a 51/48 rift. That qualifies as a bare majority, not overwhelming support, a fact that is likely to prompt many in the 51% to accuse mathematics of liberal bias. The narrow margin of victory for our incumbent president is mirrored by a very close electoral college; assuming Bush carries the last two unknown states, it will still only be 286-252, for a 53/47 split.
While it's true, as many have claimed in the past few days, that Bush has received more votes than any other president in history, that more votes were cast against
this president than any other incumbent in history renders that little factoidal nugget meaningless.
We progressives can accept that we lost and begin our rebuilding efforts. Moreover, we expect that, as losing the popular vote in 2000 certainly prompted no restraint, the current administration will harbor zero compunction about blazing ahead with a divisively conservative agenda.
Still, one thing progressives generally will not broach is intellectual dishonesty. If the voting majority wants to inflict Bush on the nearly 50% of the country who supported Kerry, then so be it, that's how our chosen and honored electoral system works. But do not pretend support for the president's policies poured out of the sky as innumerable as the stars in heaven, for if barely 1% of America's population had stayed home sick on Tuesday, a Kerry "mandate" would be the word of the day instead.
So but like
Sunday Chris IM'd me and he was all im sorry baby and i was like, yeah sure right, prick, leave me the fuck alone, but like he kept IMing me all day and i IMed Jenna and told her he was like harassing me and she was so totaly disugsted and we were like plotting how to get Chris and i finally loged off and he started calling me. i knew i thas him because the caller id was his friend's cell but he didn't say anything i just like answered and wasn't nobody on th eline. So I fucking *69ed him and i didn't even wait fo rhte hello i just went off on him i called him a fucking childish asshole i said like, you got a small dick and it's like, mishapen and crooked and shit, and like i told him all sorts of stuff and i hope it was his friend instead of chris so that now his firends know what a shit-head incompitint lover he is.
and like so monday I wnet over to Jenna's house and we were just chatting online, and like doing our homework and shit, and like chris comes back on and he's like harassing us some more, tellin' Jenna she's stupid and ugly and fuckin let me talk and stay the fuck out of it, bitch, so i got on there and told him fuck off you small-dicked perv, and w ewent downstares and just like watched a movie it was the ring, pretty scary i think I havent seen it b4.
So then like on toosday----yesterday--- i saw chris in the halls at school all feelin up on sum slizz and it was like tracy wiltman, that fuckin skank-ho, i mean sure my tits would look that big too if i put them on a plate under my shirt and fuckin who wears bangs anymore? its so fuckin tacky and shes such a slut, she like gave handjobs to bobby eric, jonny horsemeyer, and ricky tan on like consecutive weeks at the football game and she's so fuckin herpetic (thanks lawrence for that word i hope i spelled it right!) its like you can smell the herpes sores whenever she come snear you-----it must be why she pours on all that fuckin nasty perfume. and i was thinking like why the fuck is he goin after fuckin tracy wiltman
like is that goddamn horny or desprit? or like has it gotten out about his small dick and she's the only one with that bigass horse-mouth of hers who can push her lips out enough to suck it? i was so fuckin pissed and i went up to him and it old him what the fuck are you doin? and shes all like hes with a winner bitch and i called her a cunt and pushed her down the stairs and she fucking so fuckin screamed like a little baby seal and i just like went to class but like in the middle of fourth hour like i got called down to the principal and there was the cunt with a bandage around her fucking precious horse-face and i got yelled at and the principal told me to apologize but like ----yeah right, i just called her a cunt right to her ekwine face (thx again, larry) and i got like suspended for ten days.
fuckin mom came got me and it like started right away and i jus tlike fuckin snapped and tol dher to lay off my shit and she like fuckin slapped me right on the freeway like---like-how fuckin safe can that be? when we got home i just fuckin like holed up
in my room and its been like 18 ours since then and i'v just been like writing in my diary and painting and like they fuckin yanked my internet and dad barged in and fuckin ripped my phone away but like they fcukin foget ----ialmost forgot----i got a modem in my computer so i just put the the phone cord in the back, fished out on eof those stupid aol cds from the trash, waited for nightfall, and now fuckin here i am world. 18, easy, on the internet. Fuckin jus try and stop me.
It's kind of like
I've been getting up eating Lucky Charms™ for four freakin' years now, savoring, relishing, loving the crunch of the first bites and the chalky squeak of the demolished marshmallows against my teeth, and the gradual sogginess seeping in my mouth and rolling down my throat—just like really enjoying my cereal, damn it, and then getting up and there are the housemates and I say, "Anyone want some Lucky Charms™?" and I just get all these fuckin' blank stares and silence and at length one kid finally stands up, cracking a smile, and says, "Look, we don't like Lucky Charms™. We like gruel," and they're all laughing because not only am I naked but I'm disemboweled, intestines around my ankles with my pants and there's red everywhere and you know what? Not even that goddamn leprechaun can help me now.