In all my letters, I try harder than anything else to make myself clear. I try to state things as simply and unambiguously as I can because I find that that’s the best way to convince my readers that Mr. Thomas W French, Esq.’s fairy tales are a sink-pit of degeneracy, corruption, and ugliness. To start, Thomas thinks that his decisions are based on reason. Of course, thinking so doesn’t make it so. I am horrified by his devotion to the idea of a benevolent dictatorship of a self-appointed elite. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that I want you to know that Thomas has an implacable determination to satisfy his own ambitions and lusts at whatever cost to his apostles, his nation, and even to his own progeny. Knowing, as they say, is half the battle. What remains is to extend the compass of democracy to conceited wackos.
Please forgive my directness, but Thomas says that the cure for evil is more evil. You know, I don’t think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. I receive a great deal of correspondence from people all over the world. And one of the things that impresses me about it is the massive number of people who realize that if he can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to get us out of the hammerlock that he is holding us in. If I am correct that Thomas brandishes the word “uncharacteristically” as a kind of up-to-date jack-o’-lantern to scare children, then one can consecrate one’s life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Thomas, however, is more likely to take over society’s eyes, ears, mind, and spirit. At any rate, I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how Thomas lectures us about interdenominationalism so often that he may soon become a major source of hearing loss. 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 Thomas.
Isn’t it odd that beer-guzzling control freaks, whose tyrannical, uncompromising lifestyle will foster and intensify Thomas’s drug-drenched drama of immorality by the end of the decade, are immune from censure? Why is that? We already have our answer; as a respected journalist put it, “I would be honored to have Thomas oppose anything I supported”. She probably could have added that Thomas is driving me nuts. I can’t take it anymore! Finally, any one of the points I made in this letter could be turned into a complete research paper, but the conclusion of each would be the same: Mr. Thomas W French, Esq. seems to have trouble constructing a grammatically correct sentence.
A handy little tool indeed.