Poem for John K

[Sideways]

Let me begin this poem with a few simple statements of fact. First fact: This is clear to every knowledgeable observer. Second fact: It's considerations of this sort that make it worth our while to learn about the intellectually challenged things Mrs. John K is up to. Third fact: The human community has had the same basic problem with resistentialism all along, ever since the second human being walked erect. These three facts bear repeating over and over again. They are simple and self-evident but it is easy to forget them in the blizzard of lies and obfuscation coming from John and her stooges these days. First things first: John has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep her gestapo loyal to her. Her principal myth is that she is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. The truth is that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for John's subterfuge. I'm thoroughly stunned.

Strange, isn't it, how contumelious, unconscionable converts to sadism are always the first to show us a gross miscarriage of common judgment? Given a choice of having John expand, augment, and intensify the size and intrusiveness of her gang or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. Hate-filled dunderheads like her tend to conveniently ignore the key issues of this or any other situation. The same holds true for savage flimflammers. Voyeurism is a source of livelihood for her. Stated differently, John insists that mediocrity is a worthwhile goal. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands she perpetrates.

It may seem obvious, but John's hatchet men claim to have no choice but to rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, disagreeable charlatans. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand. Maybe you, too, want to create a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance, so let me warn you: John recently went through an elitism phase in which she tried repeatedly to calumniate helpless slobs. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of hers has entirely passed. My evidence is that John seizes every opportunity to tell us how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and—most importantly—what not to know. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that if you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all around you, you will indisputably find that John obscures the true meaning of her tracts with propaganda and fancy talk. More than that, we must find more constructive contexts in which to work toward resolving conflicts in such a way that there is nothing John can do about it except learn to live with the fait accompli. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that John has any control over. But that's inconsequential because I'm giving John the benefit of the doubt, which is more than she's given me. An obvious parallel from a slightly different context is that I can guarantee the readers of this letter that she complains a lot. What's ironic, though, is that she hasn't made even a single concrete suggestion for improvement or identified a single problem with the system as it exists today.

John insists that she has no choice but to defile the air and water in the name of profit. Her reasoning is that simplism is a noble goal. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but John has never gotten ahead because of her hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of John's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. Her artifices are not our only concern. To state the matter in a few words, unholy Maoism is not new. To say anything else would be a lie.

John sees no reason why she shouldn't spit on sacred icons. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that I am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset John. Here's what I have to say to them: Some distasteful pickpockets are actually considering helping John gag free speech. How quickly such people forget that they were lied to, made fun of, and ridiculed by John on numerous occasions.

Feebleminded absenteeism is widespread and growing stronger as it permeates school systems, universities, and the media. Am I aware of how John will react when she reads that last sentence? Yes. Do I care? No, because if anything will free us from the shackles of her nit-picky ideals, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that John wants to undermine everyone's capacity to see, or change, the world as a whole. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is John's gossamer grasp of reality.

If you believe nothing else that I've written about John, you can believe this: I'm no psychiatrist. Still, from the little I know about psychiatry I can clearly say that John seems to exhibit many of the symptoms of Asperger's syndrome. I don't say that to judge but merely to put John's lazy vaporings into perspective. There are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and John doing some censorious thing every few weeks.

I've heard of abominable things like totalitarianism and neocolonialism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves—ideas which John's ignorant, unthinking, immature brain is too small to understand. I have a plan to address the legitimate anger, fear, and alienation of people who have been mobilized by John because they saw no other options for change. I call this plan "Operation establish democracy and equality". (Granted, I need a shorter, catchier name but that one will do for now.) My plan's underlying motif is that John is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, she has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people she desires to lead.

John should do some research next time before printing half-truths and misinformation. Let's be sure that I've made myself absolutely clear: A central point of John's belief systems is the notion that John's mistakes are always someone else's fault. Perhaps she should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think she'd find that her methods of interpretation are bad not only for the immortal soul but also for mortal men and women. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, if John had done her homework, she'd know that her lies come in many forms. Some of her lies are in the form of opuscula. Others are in the form of arguments. Still more are in the form of folksy posturing and pretended concern and compassion.

John's claim that incontinent varmints and coprophagous cads should rule this country is factually unsupported and politically motivated. In other words, at this point in the letter I had planned to tell you that John demands her freedoms while unhesitatingly and hypocritically encroaching upon the rights of others. However, one of my colleagues pointed out that I can fight only for something that I love, love only what I respect, and respect only what I at least know. Hence, I discarded the discourse I had previously prepared and substituted the following discussion in which I argue that if John succeeds in her attempt to marginalize me based on my gender, race, or religion, it'll have to be over my dead body. She uses the word "predisadvantageously" to justify increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence. In doing so, she is reversing the meaning of that word as a means of disguising the fact that my position is that she is capable of going berserk without notice. John, in contrast, argues that misguided libertines aren't ever dissolute. This disagreement merely scratches the surface of the ideological chasm festering between me and John. The only rational way to bridge this chasm is for her to admit that she has a vested interest in making me self-censor my critique of her. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to her. With this letter, I hope I have made my views clear: Mrs. John K's permissive attitude toward crude language and gestures, sexual promiscuity, and drugs makes me think that anyone the least bit knowledgeable about John's treasonous background would know that nothing appears more plausible at first sight, nor more ill-founded and namby-pamby upon closer inspection, than John's fibs.

[John K.]

Wow, you type fast! Wait until I tell Mrs. K. that the great Mickey wrote a post about her. She won't know what you were pontificating about, but I'm sure she'll be honored, or some lesser emotion.

[John K.]

In the event that anyone stumbles upon this thread and wonders what compelled Mickey to rant against me...

In two forum threads this afternoon, he posted in his "Sideways" screen name, but signed the posts "Geoffrey". Before he could edit the posts, which he did, I took screen shots. These are included as attachments in each thread.

Make of it what you will. Write a poem about it. Rant against me, I'm such a jerk! Ask the real Mrs. K., most days she would agree with you!

For me, I'll just be wondering why Mickey would post as Sideways and sign as Geoffrey. Not just once, but twice. Do they share screen names?

Oh yeah, in worst poem contest, I think this one would be a winner! It doesn't even rhyme!

[lazariuk]

Third fact: The human community has had the same basic problem with resistentialism all along, ever since the second human being walked erect. These three facts bear repeating over and over again.

I found your whole poem to be worthwhile reading but the above in particular. I had never heard that word resistentialism before and learning about how it is used seems helpful in a number of ways.