*cough* tongue in cheek post is tongue in cheek.
People take stuff -way- too seriously.
In reference to posts after the one quoted above, I was personally always a fan of DracoBieber, but then I am
evil.
Or at the very least unaligned.
In all fairness, though, tongue-in-cheek post can't seem to help being followed up with "j/k lol but actually im being srs guys" which has led to a great deal more awkwardness than necessary. The sheer glee with which Hon. Def Con responds to each such attempts to counter his argument demonstrates the classic behaviors of what many forums refer to as "trolling." To whit: before Hon. Def Con I starts ripping tendons and ligaments with his typical knee-jerk reaction to my letters, he should realize that his push to replace Robert's Rules of Order with "facilitated consensus building" at all important meetings is primarily an effort to retain power and control. The following text regards my complaints of recent days against him and his subtle but apolaustic attempts to trick our children into adopting unconventional, disapproved-of opinions and ways of life. We are now living in a post-ideological age. So what's the connection between that and his commentaries? The connection is that by writing this letter, I am decidedly sticking my head far above the parapet. The big danger is that Hon. Def Con will retaliate against me. He'll most likely try to force me to lose heart although another possibility is that I am reminded of the quote, "His précis are grounded in phony acts of kindness." This comment is not as temperamental as it seems because Hon. Def Con has been known to "prove" statistically that he is the arbiter of all things. As you might have suspected, his proof is flawed. The primary problem with it is that it replaces a legitimate claim of association with an illegitimate claim of causality. Consequently, Hon. Def Con's "proof" demonstrates only that only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. But the first step is to acknowledge that Hon. Def Con's method (or school, or ideology—it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of "Hon. Def Con-ism". It is a rummy and avowedly brutal philosophy that aims to convince innocent children to follow a path that leads only to a life of crime, disappointment, and destruction.
Hon. Def Con wants to convince impressionable young people that we have too much freedom. I shared his comments with my own parents, and my mom got scared and said and said 'you're moving with your aunt and uncle in Bel-Air.' I whistled for a cab and when it came near the license plate said 'Fresh' and had a dice in the mirror if anything I could say that this cab was rare but I thought now forget it, yo home to Bel-Air! I pulled up to a house about seven or eight and I yelled to the cabby 'Yo, holmes smell you later!' Looked at my kingdom I was finally there to settle my throne as the prince of Bel-Air.
But then I'm a fan of the classics, myself.
