diary4

Nov 17
Dear Diary,
     As much as some people may disagree with the following observations, I stand firmly by them. I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere. The lecherous deplorable hooliganism I've been writing about is not primarily the fault of execrable reprehensible prigs, nor of the deranged paranoiacs who force me to undergo "treatment" to cure my "problem". It is the fault of SugarHigh. While criticizing her opponents for enforcing a malodorous orthodoxy, SugarHigh herself is trying to enforce a particular orthodoxy -- the orthodoxy of pathological obstructionism.

In case you don't know, if the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to inculcate in the reader an inquisitive spirit and a skepticism about beliefs that SugarHigh's lieutenants take for granted. Worst of all, our children's children would never forgive us for letting her produce nothing but filth. To sum it all up, on that basis, I should, at this point, show SugarHigh how she is as wrong as wrong can be.

Nov. 16
Dear Diary,
     I need to get something out of the way before I begin. I must say that ScubaStev's shell games are twisted to the core. Without going into all the gory details, let's just say that someone has been giving ScubaStev's brain a very thorough washing, and now ScubaStev is trying to do the same to us. His hirelings will carry the product of his work into the future, even after ScubaStev himself is long gone. (Read as: ScubaStev has a deficiency of real goals.) In the end, the most telling thing is that I am intellectually honest enough to admit my own previous ignorance in that matter. I only wish that he had the same intellectual honesty. I don't mean to imply that he is simply incapable of entertaining an unorthodox idea, but it's true, nonetheless.

     ScubaStev's is the prototypical face of Marxism, and every intellectually honest person knows it. I acknowledge freely and make no apology for the fact that I once considered it reasonable for vengeful pathetic clods to gag free speech. But now I know that I must ask that ScubaStev's lackeys work beyond the predatory plasticity of ScubaStev's insinuations. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to open the floodgates of diabolism.

     The main dissensus between me and ScubaStev is that I feel that letting ScubaStev perpetrate acts of the most stubborn character is a recipe for disaster. ScubaStev, on the other hand, contends that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. I think that anyone willing to study and ponder my position on most current matters will unequivocally find that there is something patently crafty in the notion that we should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy. Deal with it. Haughty publishers of hate literature can go right ahead and convict me for saying that as witnesses to mankind's inner dissatisfaction, we must raise several issues about his insincere slurs that are frequently missing from the drivel that masquerades for discourse on this topic, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame. I must emphasize this because ScubaStev insists that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject. At first, you might be unsure as to whether he has a different view of reality from the rest of us. But on deeper inspection, you'll decidedly conclude that he claims that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. Predictably, he cites no hard data for that claim. This is because no such data exist. Unfortunately, I can already see the response to this letter. Someone, possibly ScubaStev himself or one of his secret agents, will write an incoherent piece about how grotty I am. If that's the case, then so be it. What I just wrote sorely needed to be written.

AudreyHorne