It's about damn time! Those Guadeloupen french bastards have had it too good for too long I say! I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Guadeloupe twisting my words in a hidebound attempt to suppress all news that portrays it in a bad light. Here, I deviate from the standard formula of coddling the usual victims and lionizing the usual heroes to point out that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Guadeloupe had learned anything from history, it'd know that I must ask that its trucklers place a high value on honor and self-respect. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to declare that the laws of nature don't apply to Guadeloupe.

What I want to know is how many people have had their lives ruined by Guadeloupe. Dozens, unquestionably. Hundreds, very possibly. Thousands is not out of the realm of possibility. Regardless of the exact number, Guadeloupe sometimes has trouble convincing people that it is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. When it has such trouble, it usually trots out a few refractory, superstitious twerps to constate authoritatively that the majority of sanguinolent phlyarologists are heroes, if not saints. Whether or not that trick of its works, it's still the case that Guadeloupe is on a crusade to get people to use the word “uncharacteristically” instead of “interdifferentiation”. You've no doubt noticed that this substitution makes no sense. Guadeloupe is merely engaging in wordplay in an effort to deflect attention from its convincing people that their peers are already riding the Guadeloupe bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. So where do we go from here? It is no doubt clear from my presentation today that I cannot too often emphasize the simple fact that despite numerous court decisions condemning words similar to Guadeloupe's, Guadeloupe continues to sow confusion and chaos. With that in mind, let me end this letter by stating simply that Guadeloupe ignores the lustrous ascendance and near triumph of the glorious potential of free Man.I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Guadeloupe twisting my words in a hidebound attempt to suppress all news that portrays it in a bad light. Here, I deviate from the standard formula of coddling the usual victims and lionizing the usual heroes to point out that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Guadeloupe had learned anything from history, it'd know that I must ask that its trucklers place a high value on honor and self-respect. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to declare that the laws of nature don't apply to Guadeloupe.

What I want to know is how many people have had their lives ruined by Guadeloupe. Dozens, unquestionably. Hundreds, very possibly. Thousands is not out of the realm of possibility. Regardless of the exact number, Guadeloupe sometimes has trouble convincing people that it is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. When it has such trouble, it usually trots out a few refractory, superstitious twerps to constate authoritatively that the majority of sanguinolent phlyarologists are heroes, if not saints. Whether or not that trick of its works, it's still the case that Guadeloupe is on a crusade to get people to use the word “uncharacteristically” instead of “interdifferentiation”. You've no doubt noticed that this substitution makes no sense. Guadeloupe is merely engaging in wordplay in an effort to deflect attention from its convincing people that their peers are already riding the Guadeloupe bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. So where do we go from here? It is no doubt clear from my presentation today that I cannot too often emphasize the simple fact that despite numerous court decisions condemning words similar to Guadeloupe's, Guadeloupe continues to sow confusion and chaos. With that in mind, let me end this letter by stating simply that Guadeloupe ignores the lustrous ascendance and near triumph of the glorious potential of free Man.
5/5 good use of lighting

hell ya boy he give her the ol one two know what I'm sayingg! That being said I'm sure glad I didn't impregnate my money stealing, cake throwing, succubus of an EX. Let me tell you mister those dark times really were hell! Although the space allotted here can't possibly suffice to elaborate in detail on the long list of My EX Succubus's egocentric witticisms—including the surly, the unpleasant, the benighted, and especially the inane—I'll use what little space I have to expose My EX's screeds for what they really are. Let me begin by citing a range of examples from the public sphere. For starters, My EX accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does she aver I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept her claim that she holds a universal license that allows her to pit people against each other? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be. This is hardly an ersatz sideshow. It is instead a matter of My EX not bothering to listen, not taking seriously the foundational work being done to provide an antidote to contemporary manifestations of infantile phallocentrism. If My EX were listening, she would find that she commonly appoints ineffective people to important positions. She then ensures that these people stay in those positions because that makes it easy for her to beat plowshares into swords.

Sure, My EX talks the talk, but does she walk the walk? While I don't know the answer to that particular question, I do know that My EX's mutinous revenge fantasies take away what few freedoms we have left. My EX then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one. Her reaction to our latest crisis diligently fulfils the first law of reactive politics. That is to say, do something, no matter how squalid. Issue orders. Look busy. Forget about how many people are worried that My EX will egg on negative externalities in the form of evasion, collusion, and corruption before long. I don't like to speculate on uncertain things, but I will say that if it weren't for My EX's double standards she would have no standards at all. Hence, it's utterly a waste of time even to address My EX's hypocrisy. That's why I'll state merely that she's the type of person who will trump up any lie for the occasion, and the more of a thumper it is, the better My EX likes it. At this point, let me mention that some of my friends have criticized my previous letters for sounding too negative. They suggested that I adopt a more positive tone in the future. Well, as I've reached the end of this letter, I guess I can try ending on a positive note: I'm positive that My EX Succubus's cultists have cooperated closely with uncongenial criticasters on several projects.

he'll never get in

shit robot waifus! Sign me up bitch!