Recieved this in a Contributor Status Comment.

[RealBronco]

Plus the whole quote is directed at brancos using "you"... but one sentence said "his"...


"I base this confident prediction on, among other things, the fact that his comments are often appallingly addlepated, sometimes impudent, frequently off-point, and occasionally ultra-maladroit. "

actually it happens throughout the whole thing. whoever wrote it tried to appear smart with big words but doesn't understand the issues created when switching from one person view to another. or from past to present tense.

[12and4]

actually it happens throughout the whole thing. whoever wrote it tried to appear smart with big words but doesn't understand the issues created when switching from one person view to another. or from past to present tense.

I noticed that as well.. but i was hinted by a certain someone that it was created using a generator Plus its hard to believe that someone with that type of vocab can misspell "received" in the title

If you stare at Sparkys picture long enough, it looks like a hydrogen bomb...

yeah staring at sparky for too long does that to a person...

[Brancos]

I think I'll confound my critics by devoting this letter not to describing harebrained trolls in general, but Brancos in particular. To begin with, Brancos's true colors have finally come out. But you knew that already. So let me add that if we fail to disabuse Brancos of the notion that it's okay if his vaporings initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend then all of our sacrifices will be as forgotten as the sand blowing across Ozymandias's dead empire. The "decay of that colossal wreck," as the poet Shelley puts it, teaches us that Brancos is too splenetic to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that he unmistakably yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, Brancos abhors the current era, in which people are free to find the inner strength to exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum. Even with no further evidence than what I've previously presented I would contend—and no person on Earth can alter my opinion—that I have to wonder where Brancos got the idea that it is my view that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to mock, ridicule, deprecate, and objurgate people for their religious beliefs. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true and I've never written anything to imply that it is.

Here are a few points to ponder:

1. This cannot go on much longer.
2. It would be hard to find anyone who doesn't agree that Brancos's adages have been a millstone around our neck for quite some time.
3. Terrorism advances Brancos's long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship.

Those points may at first seem unrelated, but when you connect the dots it becomes clear that Brancos claims that the sky is falling. That claim is preposterous and, to use Brancos's own language, overtly smarmy. No history can justify it. Why does he want to transform our society into a contemptible war machine? I myself believe it's to create such chaotic conditions in our lives that we'll welcome massive regulation, police restraints, and New World Order socialist oppression just to get order again. If you don't believe me then consider that I myself can't make heads or tails of Brancos's effusions. I mean, does he want to create a desolation and call it peace, or doesn't he?

I want to view the realms of resistentialism and adventurism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. That may seem simple enough, but Brancos's hired goons employ carefully developed psychological techniques to leave us in the lurch. I'll go further: Brancos is trying to hide the fact that the documentation of this matter is abundant and conclusive. Nevertheless, one thing that rings true with crystalline clarity is that I myself am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Brancos. Here's what I have to say to them: Brancos will stop at nothing to get his way. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that in this era of rising scapegoatism we must weaken the critical links in his nexus of wily expansionism?

This is not a question of mandarinism or escapism. Rather, it is a question about how Brancos's intimates believe that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. What I just said is a very important point but I'm afraid a lot of readers might miss it so I'll say a few more words on the subject. Seeing Brancos succeed at exercising both subtlety and thoroughness in managing both the news and the entertainment that gets presented to us has left me with a number of unanswered questions—questions such as "When he looks in the mirror in the morning, does Brancos see more than the worthless face of a capricious maniac?" In plain, simple-to-understand English, he cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, I have some of Brancos's writings in front of me right now. In one of them, Brancos maintains that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. If you don't find that shocking then consider that the crux of the issue is that Brancos's coalition of coldhearted pickpockets and mingy knuckleheads is a distant cousin of the communist political organizations that were responsible for the murders of at least 90 million people. And let me tell you, it takes more than a mass of jaundiced rumormongers to fight tooth and nail against Brancos. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to encourage our spirits to soar.

Brancos makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, Brancos's claim that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. The fact of the matter is that while he manufactures crises over factionalism, Brancos's lynch mob has been quashing other people's opinions. Because I leave open the question of the extent to which this discussion could be applied to the worst types of debauched malingerers there are, it therefore stands to reason that he hates you—yes, you, because you, like me, want to indicate in a rough and approximate way the two sex-crazed tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern onanism. This is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact.

Difficult times lie ahead. Fortunately, we have the capacity to circumvent much of the impending misery by working together to deal with the relevant facts. Riddle me this: Why is it that 99 times out of 100, Brancos is an enemy to his friends and a friend to his enemies? The answer should be self-evident so let me just point out that Brancos uses big words like "cinematographical" to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although Brancos's zingers may reek like a skunk, if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would indubitably say that I do not have the time in one sitting to go into the long answer as to why Brancos should find Dorothy and Toto, skip down the yellow-brick road, get a brain from the Wizard, and learn how not to put contemptuous thoughts in our children's minds. But the short answer is that an armed revolt against him is morally justified. However, I assert that it is not yet strategically justified.

What a joyful affair it would be for Brancos if he managed to get away with fleecing us. He'd be laughing through his snout like a sow grinning at her little piglets. He'd be chortling at everyone's obliviousness to the fact that he wants us to degrade and disgrace both ourselves and our posterity by marginalizing me based on my gender, race, or religion. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how society is screaming for his philippics. That's just not true. If anything will free us from the shackles of his nefarious put-downs, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that in my observations upon sectarianism, 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 Brancos uses statism to envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I indeed feel that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to analyze Brancos's orations in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion.

An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. Keep that in mind the next time you catch Brancos branding me as shallow. It would stand to reason that he is stepping over the line when he attempts to steal our birthrights—way over the line. Have you noticed that in just about everything Brancos writes, his underlying premise is that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality? I don't know about you, but that sure rings hollow to me.

There isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that Brancos's blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Brancos's from the get-go. Brancos extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. I trust him about as far as I can throw him. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.

When I'm through with Brancos he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. You've heard me say that his acolytes are all bumptious twerps. True, that's a cheap shot, but too often they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that image. I close this letter along the same lines it opened on: The elasticity of Brancos's interpretation of the Bible shields Brancos from having to take a stand for anything morally correct yet politically (spiritually?) unpopular.

[12and4]

I think I'll confound my critics by devoting this letter not to describing harebrained trolls in general, but Brancos in particular. To begin with, Brancos's true colors have finally come out. But you knew that already. So let me add that if we fail to disabuse Brancos of the notion that it's okay if his vaporings initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend then all of our sacrifices will be as forgotten as the sand blowing across Ozymandias's dead empire. The "decay of that colossal wreck," as the poet Shelley puts it, teaches us that Brancos is too splenetic to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that he unmistakably yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, Brancos abhors the current era, in which people are free to find the inner strength to exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum. Even with no further evidence than what I've previously presented I would contend—and no person on Earth can alter my opinion—that I have to wonder where Brancos got the idea that it is my view that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to mock, ridicule, deprecate, and objurgate people for their religious beliefs. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true and I've never written anything to imply that it is.

Here are a few points to ponder:

1. This cannot go on much longer.
2. It would be hard to find anyone who doesn't agree that Brancos's adages have been a millstone around our neck for quite some time.
3. Terrorism advances Brancos's long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship.

Those points may at first seem unrelated, but when you connect the dots it becomes clear that Brancos claims that the sky is falling. That claim is preposterous and, to use Brancos's own language, overtly smarmy. No history can justify it. Why does he want to transform our society into a contemptible war machine? I myself believe it's to create such chaotic conditions in our lives that we'll welcome massive regulation, police restraints, and New World Order socialist oppression just to get order again. If you don't believe me then consider that I myself can't make heads or tails of Brancos's effusions. I mean, does he want to create a desolation and call it peace, or doesn't he?

I want to view the realms of resistentialism and adventurism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. That may seem simple enough, but Brancos's hired goons employ carefully developed psychological techniques to leave us in the lurch. I'll go further: Brancos is trying to hide the fact that the documentation of this matter is abundant and conclusive. Nevertheless, one thing that rings true with crystalline clarity is that I myself am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Brancos. Here's what I have to say to them: Brancos will stop at nothing to get his way. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that in this era of rising scapegoatism we must weaken the critical links in his nexus of wily expansionism?

This is not a question of mandarinism or escapism. Rather, it is a question about how Brancos's intimates believe that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. What I just said is a very important point but I'm afraid a lot of readers might miss it so I'll say a few more words on the subject. Seeing Brancos succeed at exercising both subtlety and thoroughness in managing both the news and the entertainment that gets presented to us has left me with a number of unanswered questions—questions such as "When he looks in the mirror in the morning, does Brancos see more than the worthless face of a capricious maniac?" In plain, simple-to-understand English, he cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, I have some of Brancos's writings in front of me right now. In one of them, Brancos maintains that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. If you don't find that shocking then consider that the crux of the issue is that Brancos's coalition of coldhearted pickpockets and mingy knuckleheads is a distant cousin of the communist political organizations that were responsible for the murders of at least 90 million people. And let me tell you, it takes more than a mass of jaundiced rumormongers to fight tooth and nail against Brancos. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to encourage our spirits to soar.

Brancos makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, Brancos's claim that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. The fact of the matter is that while he manufactures crises over factionalism, Brancos's lynch mob has been quashing other people's opinions. Because I leave open the question of the extent to which this discussion could be applied to the worst types of debauched malingerers there are, it therefore stands to reason that he hates you—yes, you, because you, like me, want to indicate in a rough and approximate way the two sex-crazed tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern onanism. This is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact.

Difficult times lie ahead. Fortunately, we have the capacity to circumvent much of the impending misery by working together to deal with the relevant facts. Riddle me this: Why is it that 99 times out of 100, Brancos is an enemy to his friends and a friend to his enemies? The answer should be self-evident so let me just point out that Brancos uses big words like "cinematographical" to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although Brancos's zingers may reek like a skunk, if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would indubitably say that I do not have the time in one sitting to go into the long answer as to why Brancos should find Dorothy and Toto, skip down the yellow-brick road, get a brain from the Wizard, and learn how not to put contemptuous thoughts in our children's minds. But the short answer is that an armed revolt against him is morally justified. However, I assert that it is not yet strategically justified.

What a joyful affair it would be for Brancos if he managed to get away with fleecing us. He'd be laughing through his snout like a sow grinning at her little piglets. He'd be chortling at everyone's obliviousness to the fact that he wants us to degrade and disgrace both ourselves and our posterity by marginalizing me based on my gender, race, or religion. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how society is screaming for his philippics. That's just not true. If anything will free us from the shackles of his nefarious put-downs, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that in my observations upon sectarianism, 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 Brancos uses statism to envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I indeed feel that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to analyze Brancos's orations in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion.

An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. Keep that in mind the next time you catch Brancos branding me as shallow. It would stand to reason that he is stepping over the line when he attempts to steal our birthrights—way over the line. Have you noticed that in just about everything Brancos writes, his underlying premise is that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality? I don't know about you, but that sure rings hollow to me.

There isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that Brancos's blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Brancos's from the get-go. Brancos extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. I trust him about as far as I can throw him. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.

When I'm through with Brancos he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. You've heard me say that his acolytes are all bumptious twerps. True, that's a cheap shot, but too often they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that image. I close this letter along the same lines it opened on: The elasticity of Brancos's interpretation of the Bible shields Brancos from having to take a stand for anything morally correct yet politically (spiritually?) unpopular.

I love quoting long posts... your headlights are out... they must be run on chargers super bowl rings.

[darth-hideous]

I think I'll confound my critics by devoting this letter not to describing harebrained trolls in general, but Brancos in particular. To begin with, Brancos's true colors have finally come out. But you knew that already. So let me add that if we fail to disabuse Brancos of the notion that it's okay if his vaporings initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend then all of our sacrifices will be as forgotten as the sand blowing across Ozymandias's dead empire. The "decay of that colossal wreck," as the poet Shelley puts it, teaches us that Brancos is too splenetic to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that he unmistakably yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, Brancos abhors the current era, in which people are free to find the inner strength to exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum. Even with no further evidence than what I've previously presented I would contend—and no person on Earth can alter my opinion—that I have to wonder where Brancos got the idea that it is my view that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to mock, ridicule, deprecate, and objurgate people for their religious beliefs. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true and I've never written anything to imply that it is.

Here are a few points to ponder:

1. This cannot go on much longer.
2. It would be hard to find anyone who doesn't agree that Brancos's adages have been a millstone around our neck for quite some time.
3. Terrorism advances Brancos's long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship.

Those points may at first seem unrelated, but when you connect the dots it becomes clear that Brancos claims that the sky is falling. That claim is preposterous and, to use Brancos's own language, overtly smarmy. No history can justify it. Why does he want to transform our society into a contemptible war machine? I myself believe it's to create such chaotic conditions in our lives that we'll welcome massive regulation, police restraints, and New World Order socialist oppression just to get order again. If you don't believe me then consider that I myself can't make heads or tails of Brancos's effusions. I mean, does he want to create a desolation and call it peace, or doesn't he?

I want to view the realms of resistentialism and adventurism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. That may seem simple enough, but Brancos's hired goons employ carefully developed psychological techniques to leave us in the lurch. I'll go further: Brancos is trying to hide the fact that the documentation of this matter is abundant and conclusive. Nevertheless, one thing that rings true with crystalline clarity is that I myself am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Brancos. Here's what I have to say to them: Brancos will stop at nothing to get his way. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that in this era of rising scapegoatism we must weaken the critical links in his nexus of wily expansionism?

This is not a question of mandarinism or escapism. Rather, it is a question about how Brancos's intimates believe that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. What I just said is a very important point but I'm afraid a lot of readers might miss it so I'll say a few more words on the subject. Seeing Brancos succeed at exercising both subtlety and thoroughness in managing both the news and the entertainment that gets presented to us has left me with a number of unanswered questions—questions such as "When he looks in the mirror in the morning, does Brancos see more than the worthless face of a capricious maniac?" In plain, simple-to-understand English, he cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, I have some of Brancos's writings in front of me right now. In one of them, Brancos maintains that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. If you don't find that shocking then consider that the crux of the issue is that Brancos's coalition of coldhearted pickpockets and mingy knuckleheads is a distant cousin of the communist political organizations that were responsible for the murders of at least 90 million people. And let me tell you, it takes more than a mass of jaundiced rumormongers to fight tooth and nail against Brancos. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to encourage our spirits to soar.

Brancos makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, Brancos's claim that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. The fact of the matter is that while he manufactures crises over factionalism, Brancos's lynch mob has been quashing other people's opinions. Because I leave open the question of the extent to which this discussion could be applied to the worst types of debauched malingerers there are, it therefore stands to reason that he hates you—yes, you, because you, like me, want to indicate in a rough and approximate way the two sex-crazed tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern onanism. This is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact.

Difficult times lie ahead. Fortunately, we have the capacity to circumvent much of the impending misery by working together to deal with the relevant facts. Riddle me this: Why is it that 99 times out of 100, Brancos is an enemy to his friends and a friend to his enemies? The answer should be self-evident so let me just point out that Brancos uses big words like "cinematographical" to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although Brancos's zingers may reek like a skunk, if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would indubitably say that I do not have the time in one sitting to go into the long answer as to why Brancos should find Dorothy and Toto, skip down the yellow-brick road, get a brain from the Wizard, and learn how not to put contemptuous thoughts in our children's minds. But the short answer is that an armed revolt against him is morally justified. However, I assert that it is not yet strategically justified.

What a joyful affair it would be for Brancos if he managed to get away with fleecing us. He'd be laughing through his snout like a sow grinning at her little piglets. He'd be chortling at everyone's obliviousness to the fact that he wants us to degrade and disgrace both ourselves and our posterity by marginalizing me based on my gender, race, or religion. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how society is screaming for his philippics. That's just not true. If anything will free us from the shackles of his nefarious put-downs, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that in my observations upon sectarianism, 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 Brancos uses statism to envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I indeed feel that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to analyze Brancos's orations in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion.

An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. Keep that in mind the next time you catch Brancos branding me as shallow. It would stand to reason that he is stepping over the line when he attempts to steal our birthrights—way over the line. Have you noticed that in just about everything Brancos writes, his underlying premise is that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality? I don't know about you, but that sure rings hollow to me.

There isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that Brancos's blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Brancos's from the get-go. Brancos extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. I trust him about as far as I can throw him. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.

When I'm through with Brancos he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. You've heard me say that his acolytes are all bumptious twerps. True, that's a cheap shot, but too often they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that image. I close this letter along the same lines it opened on: The elasticity of Brancos's interpretation of the Bible shields Brancos from having to take a stand for anything morally correct yet politically (spiritually?) unpopular.

Are you willing to write essays for money?