"Bruce on horizon" wrote in message . ..

Well put and thanks for the input Neal. We all admit to being idiots...you
don't want to be read by idiots...therefore take your eloquent prose and
post it were there are intellectuals capable of interpreting your lofty
ramblings. We idiots won't miss you one bit...even Peggy who is smart as
****!
Bruce


Dear Group of Idiots and Peggie Hall Labia Lappers,

All too often, some people attempt to make an argument by attacking and insulting those
who hold opposing views. Bruce's tactics are a perfect example. So let's begin, quite
properly, with a brief look at the historical development of the problem, of its attempted
solutions, and of the eternal argument about it. Try as I may, I can't understand why he
would want to gag free speech. I and Bruce part company when it comes to the issue of
sucking Peggie's dick. He feels that newsgroups should belong to imbeciles, while I insist
that she has garnered enough support to accelerate the natural tendency of Usenet to devolve
from lame to lamer, liberty to tyranny, virtue to vice and freedom of speech to censorship
but not enough support to make her **** not stink. Or, to express that sentiment without all
of the emotionally charged lingo, he uses the words without ever having taken the time to
look them up in the dictionary. People who are too lazy to get their basic terms right should
be ignored, not debated, debased, debauched and debunked as is the temptation.

It's a well-known fact that the worst sorts of dissolute yokels there are thrive on hatred
rather than love. It's an equally well-known fact that I don't need to be particularly delicate
here. When logic puts these two facts together, the necessary result is an understanding that
Bruce takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent
referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't
support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position.

Out of the vast number of devastating evils for which self-righteous yahoos are directly or
indirectly responsible, I shall pick out only a single one which is most in keeping with the inner
essence of Bruce's antisocial agendas: defeatism. The idea of letting him fill the air with
recrimination and rancor is, in itself, treacherous. That being the case, we can infer that the
baneful nature of his witticisms is not just a rumor. It is a fact to which I can testify. I think
I've dished it out to Bruce as best as I can in this letter. I hope you now understand why I
say that Bruce is positing a "valid" logic devoid of empirical content (i.e., devoid of facts).

Respectfully,
Capt. Neal