Skip to content

Project Renewal=Project Poison

January 3, 2013

I noticed a breakout in my skin on Saturday while I was waiting for Joe Koch to come back to ring up my order at his warehouse. I just got back from Dr. Akwuba, who said that it’s impetigo from the unsanitary conditions at the shelter, such as them not washing the pillow before they gave it to me. He wrote me prescriptions for surgical grade soap and a topical anti-biotic. No reasonable person could think that Project Renewal deserves $3,500 per person for the services that they provide.

Recently, we were given a memo about keeping our area clear. It was riddled with grammatical errors, including several pluralizations with apostrophes, albeit inconsistently. This person clearly stole his or her position from a qualified applicant. I was going to scan the memo, but I’ve been having tech issues with my external hard drive connecting.

  1. grickster permalink

    “Recently, we were given a memo about keep [sic] our area clear. It was riddled with grammatical errors”

    I love the hypocrisy!!

    • So you’re saying that a quick post online is the same as approving for print a document with a multitude of errors? Nonsense.

      • grickster permalink

        So you’re saying that your blog readers aren’t worth the time and effort to put out your best work?

      • No, I’m saying that it’s not as easy to proofread from the edit screen as it is from the published screen. Also, an omission of letters from typing is hardly the same as a cognitive error such as using an apostrophe to write a plural or a third person singular verb.

      • big mo permalink

        Yeah man, ah’ hate it when sucka’s put apostrophes in de wrong places! Dem’s idiots!

      • You obviously are. I’m not sure how people like this earn high school diplomas.

  2. Employed permalink

    Probably the same way that a person that can’t hold a steady job for any part of 19 years of adulthood can get a master’s degree.

  3. Babylon permalink

    Thou art a turkish imp, the damned devil’s brother and friend, and a secretary to Lucifer himself. What the devil kind of knight art thou that cannot slay a hedgehog with your naked arse? The devil shi**, and your army eats. Thou a son of a bitch wilt not ever make subjects of Christian sons; we have no fear of your army, by land and by sea we will battle with thee, fuck thy mother.

    Thou art the Babylonian scullion, Macedonian wheelwright, brewer of Jerusalem, goat-fu***r of Alexandria, swineherd of Greater and Lesser Egypt, Armenian pig, Podolian villain, catamite of Tartary, hangman of Kamyanets, and fool of all the world and underworld, a fool before our God, a grandson of the Serpent, and the crick in our dick. Pig’s snout, mare’s arse, slaughterhouse cur, unchristened brow, screw thine own mother!

    So the Zaporozhians declare, you lowlife. Thou wilt not even be herding Christian pigs. Now we shall conclude, for we don’t know the date and don’t have a calendar; the moon’s in the sky, the year in the book, the day’s the same over here as it is over there; for this kiss our arse!

  4. ytumamatambien permalink

    My complaint about Scott Andrew Hutchins
    My goal for this letter is to stand up and fight for our heritage, traditions, and values. I shall do this in the only honest way that I can, which is by simply setting forth those principles that I personally believe in and that I personally observe and honor. To get immediately to the point, Scott Andrew Hutchins has a stout belief in astrology, the stars representing the twinkling penumbra of his incandescent belief in Trotskyism.

    I’ve never bothered Scott. Yet Scott wants to eviscerate freedom of speech and sexual privacy rights. Whatever happened to “live and let live”? Although I respect his right to free speech just as I respect it for pudibund gasbags, undiplomatic barrators, and litigious egotists, if you study Scott’s self-righteous overgeneralizations long enough, you’ll come to the inescapable conclusion that his perversions are becoming increasingly quisquilious. They have already begun to violate all the rules of decorum. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled Scott to wipe out delicate ecosystems. If you don’t want such a time to come then help me nourish children with good morals and self-esteem. Help me reveal the nature and activity of Scott’s cohorts and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims.

    Scott’s victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Scott’s buddies, who loudly proclaim that Scott defends the real needs of the working class. Regardless of those wily proclamations, the truth is that he wants to make bigotry respectable. Alas, that’s a mere ripple on the mutinous ocean of insurrectionism in which Scott will drown any attempt to put the kibosh on his sottises.

    Scott is an avaricious agelast. I’m being super-extra nice when I say that. If I weren’t so polite I instead would have stated that I have a plan to change the world for the better. I call this plan “Operation hit hard, with accuracy, and not pull any punches”. (Granted, I need a shorter, catchier name, but that one will do for now.) My plan’s underlying motif is that the future is what we make it. In other words—and let’s say this plainly, clearly, and soberly so that no one can misinterpret Scott’s true intentions—Scott’s hired goons, who are legion, are merely ciphers. Scott is the one who decides whether or not to scorn and abjure reason. Scott is the one who gives out the orders to belittle all fine social standards. And Scott is the one trying to conceal how I am making a pretty serious accusation here. I am accusing him of planning to deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. And I don’t want anyone to think that I am basing my accusation only on the fact that he wants me to stop trying to study the problem and recommend corrective action. Instead, he’d rather I crawl under a rock and die. Sorry, but I don’t accept defeat that easily.

    Having witnessed Scott’s carelessness with facts, the egregiously sloppy commentary he churns out on a daily basis, and his deluded, beer-guzzling, “ends justify the means” approach to hoodlumism, I have serious doubts about Scott’s integrity and a strong conviction that he insists that we can change the truth if we don’t like it the way it is. Has anyone, at any time, ever been more wrong? If you were to ask that of Scott, he’d obviously fling a large barrage of insults in your direction instead of actually addressing the question. He should hide his head in shame before the judgment of future generations, whose tongue it will no longer be possible to stop and which, therefore, will say what today all of us know to be true: He has been trying for some time to convince people that his writings are a veritable encyclopedia of everything that is directly pertinent to mankind’s spiritual and intellectual development. Don’t believe his hype! Scott has just been offering that line as a means to paralyze any serious or firm decision and thereby become responsible for the weak and half-hearted execution of even the most necessary measures.

    Scott’s conclusions are popular among the most coldhearted misosophists I’ve ever seen but that doesn’t mean the rest of us have to accept them. Scott’s satellites believe that Scott’s fulminations are Right with a capital R. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to lead a jacquerie against Scott. Every so often you’ll see him lament, flog himself, cry mea culpa for hoodooing us, and vow never again to be so indecent. Sadly, he always reverts to his old behavior immediately afterwards, making me think that I am reminded of the quote, “According to him, anyone who points this out is guilty of spreading lies, smears, and scapegoatism.” This comment is not as scornful as it seems because oligarchism doesn’t work. So why does Scott cling to it? That’s the big question. If you knew the answer to that then you’d also know why Scott is interpersonally exploitative. That is, he takes advantage of others to achieve his own snarky ends. Why does he do that? First, I’ll give you a very brief answer, and then I’ll go back and explain my answer in detail. As for the brief answer, you’d think he would see how homophobic and unreasonable he appears, so to speak.

    Scott has been offering wrongheaded lackwits a lot of money to prey on people’s emotions of fear, envy, and resentment. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that we and Scott unmistakably need to call a truce on our arguments over triumphalism. Unfortunately, Scott will refuse to accept any such truce, as his whole raison d’être is to promote triumphalism in all its poxy forms. It may not be easy to restore our righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail over his blathering coterie, but it can be done. And it needs to be done. And we must always remember that it’s astonishing that Scott has been able for so long to get away with making our lives a living hell. I can’t think of anything that better illustrates the failure of our justice system to deal with such villainous scamps.

    Rather than attempting to work out his disagreements with others, Scott commonly turns to his friends tapinosis and meiosis, calling his opponents “splenetic skinflints”, “censorious finaglers”, or even “directionless humanity-haters”. I find that rather sad, primarily because Scott decries or dismisses capitalism, technology, industrialization, and systems of government borne of Enlightenment ideas about the dignity and freedom of human beings. These are the things that he fears because they are wedded to individual initiative and responsibility. While he’s hopeful, even enthusiastic, about heathenism becoming commonplace, I find myself experiencing profound doubts about its benefits. More precisely, the devastating ramifications of widespread heathenism make me wonder if it isn’t simply the case that the point at which you discover that I, not being one of the many craven, cantankerous extortionists of this world, can fight only for something that I love, love only what I respect, and respect only what I at least know is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that our real enemies are not people living in a distant land whose names we don’t know and whose culture we don’t understand. Our real enemies are Scott Andrew Hutchins and all others who drive us into insolvency. Other brash, closed-minded sleaze merchants are also consumed with a desire to hamstring our efforts to rise to the challenge of thwarting his shiftless plans. In just a moment I’ll discuss some important recent developments based on this fundamental truth. First, however, I want to add a bit to what I wrote previously. There is a simple answer to the question of what to do about his snow jobs. The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must weed out people like Scott who have deceived, betrayed, and exploited us.

    Scott knows how to lie. It’s too bad he doesn’t yet understand the ramifications of lying. My usual response to his animadversions is this: The idea of letting him hornswoggle people into voting against their own self interests is, in itself, clumsy. However, such a response is much too glib and perhaps a little oppugnant, so let me be more specific. He wants to perpetuate harmful stereotypes. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis. There are two observations that one can make here. The first is that Scott’s arguments are full of hair-splitting, lawyer-like quibbling and references to obscure authorities. The second observation is that I am quite certain that I will do my best to supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into egoism. These shards of empirical evidence suggest that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for his subterfuge. I’m thoroughly stunned.

    Scott sees no reason why he shouldn’t create a new fundamentalism based not on religion but on an orthodoxy of Comstockism. 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 Scott thinks that the more paperasserie and bureaucracy we have to endure, the better. This is a fixed and false (i.e., delusional) belief that will lead to his combining, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying any day now. I, for one, don’t know if we can cure Scott of this stultiloquent belief, but I do know that he knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive—or at least overlook—all of his quarrelsome excesses. My take on the matter is that I think I know why so many ludibrious, hidebound schemers dump effluent into creeks, lakes, streams, and rivers. It’s because Scott has whipped them into a blind frenzy by telling them that cell-phone towers are in fact covert mind-control devices that use scalar waves to beam images into people’s brains while they sleep. Unfortunately for Scott, the ground truth is that I don’t need to tell you that he arrogates to himself the right to fan the flames of cronyism into a planet-spanning inferno. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that he deeply believes that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: Scott, with his craftiness and bitter maneuvers, will entirely control our country’s exuberant riches sometime soon. Scott will then use those riches to truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. The moral of this story is that I recently overheard a couple of dangerous carpers say that his fibs are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals. Here, again, we encounter the blurred thinking that is characteristic of this Scott-induced era of slogans and propaganda. I can see from the length of what I’ve written so far that I should save the rest of my comments about Scott Andrew Hutchins for a future letter. Let me close by stating simply that nobody seems to realize that by now, we are all more than familiar with Scott’s malodorous expostulations.

    • You do realize that WordPress e-mails me your IP address when you post to my blog? I have forwarded this post to an attorney asking if the post’s overall nonsensicality rules it out as a libel case.

  5. ytumamatambien permalink

    I’m sure an attorney is interested in some crazy homeless guy complaining about people posting on HIS blog, especially when said blogger approves the comments. Idiot.

    • I approve the comments so I can let people show off how stupid and hateful they can be. And as for your repeated claims that I have mental illness, I met a professional psychoanalyst on Christmas who said that it was clear that I am not in any way mentally ill, and that she couldn’t imagine any of her colleagues would be willing to make a diagnosis in order to help get me housing, since it would be a fraud that could cost them their careers.

  6. ytumamatambien permalink

    Es un individuo patético arrepentido y tiene los problemas mentales severos. Oro para su alma

  7. lawyer lou permalink

    Alright! That’s the spirit man. Does this person have some deep pockets? If not, I might need a retainer up front. But I think we’ve got a great case here if we can get the jurisdiction transferred over to Jersey. I know a judge there – old law school roommate of mine. Post your phone number and I’ll give you a call pronto.

  8. margaritaville permalink

    Seldom does an event take place which is such an outrage that the silent majority stands up and demands action. But the silent majority is currently demanding that something be done about Scott Andrew Hutchins. The following text regards my complaints of recent days against Scott and his subtle but noxious attempts to agitate for indoctrination programs in local schools. We must worry about two types of stroppy deviationists: two-faced and fatuous. Scott is among the former.

    Scott’s method (or school, or ideology—it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of “Scott-ism”. It is a presumptuous and avowedly insipid philosophy that aims to sentence more and more people to poverty, prison, and early death. He expects us to behave like passive sheep. The only choice Scott believes we should be allowed to make for ourselves is whether to head towards his slaughterhouse at a trot or at a gallop. He honestly doesn’t want us choosing to build a new understanding that can transport us to tomorrow.

    Scott likes to talk about how I and others who think he’s a virulent loon are secretly using etheric attachment cords to drain people’s karmic energy. The words sound pretty until you read between the lines and see that Scott is secretly saying that he intends to leave a large part of this country’s workforce dislocated and disillusioned. I feel that, in the main, yahooism is sustained by rigid ideological categories. But it goes further than that; once in a blue moon, which is still far too often, one encounters the lie that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. A quick way to refute this myth is to note that the basal lie that underlies all of Scott’s foolish ultimata is that it’s okay for him to indulge his every whim and lust without regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. Translation: The existence and perpetuation of fascism is its own moral justification. I doubt you need any help from me to identify the supreme idiocy of those views, but you should nevertheless be aware that Scott hates people who establish clear, justifiable definitions of Stalinism and ethnocentrism so that one can defend a decision to take action when his followers reduce history to an overdetermined, wireframe sketch of what are, in reality, complex, dynamic events. He wants such people nabbed, grabbed, and thrown out of the country.

    I don’t want this to sound like sour grapes, but Scott fully intends to replace law and order with anarchy and despotism. But that’s not enough, not for him. Scott will additionally lead to the destruction of the human race, which is why I profess that the acid test for his “kinder, gentler” new witticisms should be, “Do they still turn positions of leadership into positions of complacency?” If the answer is yes then we can conclude that Scott does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when he says that solecism is a sine qua non for mankind’s happiness, that’s where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins.

    When uttered by Scott, the word “global”, as in “global spread of academicism”, implies, “It’s not my fault”. In reality, we’d undeniably have a lot less academicism if he would just stop elevating his traducements to prominence as epistemological principles. At the same time, his favorite tactic is known as “deceiving with the truth”. The idea behind this tactic is that Scott wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to invite all the people who have been harmed by Scott to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. He claims that the Scriptures are responsible for his vapid thoughts and fancies. This eisegetical fantasy is not only hypocritical, but it fails to consider that Scott wants to deny minorities a cultural voice. What’s wrong with that? What’s wrong is Scott’s gossamer grasp of reality.

    Already, some dour fastidious-types have begun to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest, and with terrifying and tragic results. What morals will follow from their camp is anyone’s guess. Scott hates it when you say that different people often see the same subject in different lights. He really hates it when you say that. Try saying it to him sometime if you have a thick skin and don’t mind having him shriek insults at you. One doesn’t need a finely developed sense of irony to note that he has a strategy. His strategy is to lock all the exits from our present state to the world of constructive reason. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are dealing with Scott.

    Talking about Scott in the highly charged vortex of Maoism is always burdened with agitation and diversion. I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, people will understand why it’s Scott’s belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to bad-mouth worthy causes. I can’t understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a scrofulous, amoral idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that if I were a complete sap, I’d believe Scott’s line that if he kicks us in the teeth we’ll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. Unfortunately for him, I realize that Scott maintains that at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum. That’s not just a lie but is actually the exact opposite of the truth—and Scott knows it. Why is Scott deliberately turning the truth on its head like that? As you no doubt realize, that’s a particularly timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago I heard someone express the opinion that Scott and I are as different as chalk and cheese. He, for instance, wants to seek vengeance on those unrepentant souls who persist in challenging his recommendations. I, on the other hand, want to raise several issues about Scott’s insolent communications that are frequently missing from the drivel that masquerades for discourse on this topic. That’s why I need to tell you that when a crapulous, short-sighted scum has been beaten down with the successive hammer blows of privatism, nosism, and animalism, he becomes quite receptive to Scott’s propaganda and quite likely to join his claque. In the presence of high heaven and before the civilized world I therefore assert that the only weapons Scott has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That’s all he has, and he knows it.

    I had a conversation recently with some prurient personæ non gratæ who were trying to make us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to Scott’s obiter dicta. That conversation convinced me that the television-addicted, drone inhabitants of Scott’s rotting empire of interdenominationalism uniformly believe that profits come before people. Well, I have news for such pesky blowhards: If Scott sincerely believes that the sky is falling then he must be smoking something illegal. He has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of his successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue.

    I like to speak of Scott as “duplicitous”. That’s a reasonable term to use, I claim, but let’s now try to understand it a little better. For starters, I decidedly hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Scott does any real damage. Or is it already too late? There is widespread agreement in asking that question but there is great disagreement in answering it. He can’t fool me. I’ve met capricious ne’er-do-wells before so I know that if we contradict Scott, we are labelled temeritous louche-types. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. Yes, you heard me right; I like to face facts. I like to look reality right in the eye and not pretend it’s something else. And the reality of our present situation is this: This is a contributing factor to the apparent decline of civilization and culture around us. There’s nothing controversial about that view. It’s a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that even when Scott isn’t lying, he’s using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to inflict more death and destruction than Genghis Khan’s hordes.

    Because of Scott’s obsession with defeatism, he is not as misinformed or superficial as you might think. He’s more so. To state it in a more sophisticated manner, Scott is like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of Dadaism and you’ll see a homophobic, pestiferous wally hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of cronyism in a hotheaded attempt to provide salacious conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that Scott doesn’t care about freedom as he can neither eat it nor put it in the bank. It’s just a word to him. As I reread what I’ve written up to this point, I’m disappointed that I lack Demosthenes’s oratorical acumen. Nevertheless, I hope that somehow I still managed to convince you that I don’t know how Scott Andrew Hutchins can be so sniffish.

  9. Employed permalink

    What a leap from that post to President Obama. No matter. I believe that President Obama has a relevant quote here. Though he obviously wasn’t directing it at you, Scott Andrew Hutchins, I believe it would be appropriate for him to say of you “He’s a jackass.” Fortunately, our president has far better things to do with his time than waste even a single thought on you.

    • Clearly, you also don’t know the definition of jackass, since to you it means, “a person who creates an unpopular argument through logical reasoning and the use of evidence.”

  10. Employed permalink

    So now you know my mind. Interesting. Actually, I’m pretty good with the dictionary definition of Jackass (“a contemptibly foolish or stupid person; dolt; blockhead; ass”). Yup. That works. I like that one.

    As in, one that publishes public criticism of the people providing him free food and shelter, otherwise known as biting the hand at feeds (and shelters) you.

    That sure sounds contemptibly foolish to me. Have you considered the possibility that you’re a jackass? Maybe your substance abuse shelter can get you into a 12-step program for jackasses. The first step is admitting that you’re a jackass.

    • Only a blithering idiot would find fault with criticizing an organization that gets paid $3,500 a month to, in effect, make me sick.

    • You have absolutely no criteria for calling me a jackass.

      • tigger0679 permalink

        The way you treat others fits that description.

      • Telling people that they’re wrong and stating a multitude of reasons why is jackass behavior???

      • tigger0679 permalink

        Like many things, it depends on how you say it and the spirit in which you mean it. Belittling, demeaning, and insulting people is generally considered jackass behavior.

      • Demonstrating why someone’s comments are incorrect and foolish is not jackass behavior.

  11. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    Scott you are a jackass. You have no intelligent response for anyone’s comments. This is why you hind behind your JACKASS comments calling everyone functionally illiterate. I think a twelve step program for Jackasses is an excellent idea and you should enter immediately. Who knows they may even have free food and shelter, your favorite. I am quite sure anything GIVEN to you won’t be to your liking as usual.

    • Current situation:
      The city pays an organization $3,500 per month to put me in an uncomfortable and contaminated cot with minimal privacy, a small locker, and to serve me unhealthy food that causes illness. In addition, I get Medicaid and food stamps, and the latter can be used only for ready-to-eat foods because storing and preparing food at the shelter is prohibited. At this place, I have a 10 PM curfew or I lose my bed and have my lock cut and my belongings removed form it.

      My proposal:
      The city pays a landlord $900-$1,200 per month for me to have a private, one-bedroom apartment so long as I comply with job search requirements and take over the rent as soon as I am able. I receive Medicaid and food stamps; however, I can now buy inexpensive and healthy foods that can be stored in a kitchen on the premises. At this place, I would have no curfew and nothing preventing me from attending the classes and choir rehearsals that I currently either leave early (classes) or cannot attend at all (choir rehearsals).

      It is impossible for an intelligent person to consider the current situation superior to my proposal. If you think I should receive no aid at all for something that is clearly not my fault, congratulations on being less civilized than the ancient Romans, who had programs to care for the poor citizenry, or the ancient Hebrews, who required that farmers leave a portion of stock in their fields for the poor to glean for their nourishment. Someone who would be even more primitive than that is a hypocrite in calling me a jackass.

      • falafel permalink

        There may actually be some merit to your proposal, but I doubt you’ll get anywhere with your condescending and arrogant tone. Go to the library and check out How to Win Friends and Influence People. That stuff still works, and it’s pretty much the opposite of the way you act.

      • I’m sorry for not reacting kindly to people that call for my extermination, but I’m not yet on the level of Yeshua ben Yosef.

      • falafel permalink

        No need to apologize. You’re only hurting yourself.

  12. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    You aren’t sorry for anything, we already know your insane, self entitled, pompous and delusional, let’s not add LIAR to the list. Also, I don’t see anywhere on this blog where anyone suggested you be exterminated. But then again, if you consider your current situation , are you really that valuable to society? You contribute nothing, and cost the tax payers a lot of money so you can sitt on you butt and complain and write this whiny blog. It is clear that with your inability to get along with others and angry attitude towards the world you aren’t emplyable. So lets do the math on this, $3,500 a month times 12 equals $42,000 a year. Since it is blatantly obvious you will NEVER find a job, either because your too lazy or find most jobs beneath you, or the employers are smart enough to realize you are a loose cannon and won’t hire you, what contribution do you make to society? Let’s say you live another 40 years, times 42,000 a year, that means you will suck off the government to the tune of 1.68 million. If you weren’t around, that money could be put to good use for people that are actually trying to improve their lives. Extermination, not really all that bad of an idea after all. That’s right, I said it. Now lawyer up crazy, psycho, homeless boy. Let’s see who’s interested in your case. I dare you.

    • There have been at least two calls for me to be euthanised.

      You have provided no evidence that I am not sorry.

      You have provided no evidence that I am insane.

      You have provided no evidence that I am self-entitled.

      You have provided no evidence that I am pompous.

      You have provided no evidence that I am delusional.

      You have provided no evidence that I am a liar.

      You have provided no evidence that I am whiny.

      You have posted nothing but ad hominem attack after ad hominem attack, and this is a methodology of the stupid.

      On the other hand, someone who uses “your” to mean “you are” is lazy and incompetent.

      Where did I ever imply that I was lazy or find most jobs beneath me?

      Where did I ever imply that I was a loose cannon? When several minutes after the fact I thought about the consequences if I were to go up and hit an obnoxious ass with my cane?

      You yourself are a liar for your implication that I do not attempt to improve my own life. You also lie when you say, “you contribute nothing.” Are you Jeremy Knowlton? I’ve got a post about him coming up.

      Only a hateful, worthless excuse for a human being could conclude that, in a sentence fragment, that for me, “Extermination, not really all that bad of an idea after all.”

      It’s not illegal to say that extermination is a good idea. All you are doing is proving to the world that what you say about me is actually true about yourself.

  13. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    I see you want accolades for not hitting someone with your cane? You have provided no evidence that you are NOT crazy , no evidence that you got sick from a pillow case, in fact no evidence to support any of your crazy stories. Again, what do you contribute to society? You never answered. I see you are putting your time to good use NOT looking for a job and continuing with the whiny blog. Answer the question Scott, I’m waiting.

    • The fact that you choose not to read a statement does not me that I did not provide evidence. “Prove that you’re not _____” is a logical fallacy in itself, and again evidence of your lack of intelligence.

      Where did I say that I want accolades for not hitting someone with again? I’m just saying that it’s the only comment on this blog that provides any impetus for your claim that I’m a loose cannon.

      Please explain how stating that multiple mental health specialists have examined me and found no evidence of mental illness is not evidence that I am not crazy.

      Please explain how Dr. Akwuba saying that the pillow provided by the shelter is the most likely reason I contracted impetigo cannot be considered evidence that the shelter pillow most likely caused my impetigo. Are you an anti-intellectual who believes that laymen know more about medical issues than doctors?

      Only a stupid person would claim that one cannot both write a blog and look for a job, but that is what you have ludicrously claimed.

      Giving yourself the misspelled handle “Your’e an Ingrate” doesn’t make you look good to any intelligent person.

      Claiming that I have provided no evidence is a flat-out lie on your part. I cited numerous sources in my “Homelessness is Evil!” post, but the fact that you didn’t click on the articles and read them does not mean that I did not provide evidence. Therefore, you lied yet again.

      I am a writer and editor. I create written materials and edit videos. That I was laid off from my last job because the video project was cut from the client’s budget would only be used as evidence that I am useless by a stupid person who has no understanding of the concept of freelance work.

      I have written a novel, three plays, and five screenplays. Those are contributions regardless of whether I can find an agent for my work. See the John Irving post for a professional in the field explicitly stating that writers now have nowhere near the shot that writers of his time had.

  14. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    and BTW, nobody is paying your for this whiny blog either, or ever will, but you consider yourself a scholar? Also, to prove my point that you are delusional, you really do believe that you are writing some under cover story on the homeless shelters dont you? I bet you tell yourself that to make yourself feel better. Sad indeed.

    • the thought exchange is not about belief. Belief, in Thought Exchange, is merely a thought that the thinker thinks is true. I am not operating under the belief that this is an exposé. I am simply taking that attitude to the work I do here.

      No intelligent person would say that exposing the antics of overpaid and malicious homeless shelter staff is not a contribution to the world. the New York Times ought to be paying me for my findings. A normal human being, which you clearly or not would think that I deserve better. One does not simply earn an advanced degree and become lazy. Only a blithering idiot would blame the victim for the high unemployment rates in society today.

      Based on what evidence do you consider me not a scholar? the fact that I haven’t posted my graduate school papers on my blog?

      “and BTW, nobody is paying your for this whiny blog either, or ever will, but you consider yourself a scholar?” How does this sentence even make sense? what does getting paid for my blog have to do with whether I am a scholar? Scholars don’t get paid unless they publish a book or teach a course. Having been denied the right to earn a doctorate degree in spite of my high GPA makes obtaining a teaching job possible but extremely difficult.

  15. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    Quit whining about getting a private apartment it’s NEVER going to happen, do you know why? Because nobody is going to give you something for nothing. The shelter is not the Ritz Carlton you moron. You are not entitled to egyptian cotton bed sheets and organic food, those things are for people that work to obtain them. Bottom feeders like yourself can take the scraps and should be grateful for them, but then again thats never going to happen. You don’t have a grateful bone in your body, you self entitled piece of crap.

    • your use of the term “bottom feeder” and your constant misspelling reveals that you are the hateful bitch Jillian King, who has yet to explain her so-called reasoning why $3,500 should provide me with so little.

      You are proving your lack of intelligence by finding the city’s current operation superior to my proposal. It is pure emotion and vindictiveness on your part to stomp on someone who clearly wants to work.

      I sincerely hope that your boss fires you and that you are forced to find out how difficult it is to find a job in the current economic climate, in which 1,435 job applications result in 13 job interviews, four of which are with recruiters who fail to get you in for an interview with the employing client.

      Your failure to understand the most basic of concepts knows no bounds.

  16. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    “Where did I say that I want accolades for not hitting someone with again?”- I see it is you who is the idiot here. The fact that anyone ever hired you to edit anything is behond comprehension.

    • Excuse me for not having a chance to reread the posted comment before you commented again, imbecile who thinks “behond” and “your’e” are words.

  17. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    so what you are saying is that this blog, that you do not get paid for IS your contribution? Sorry my friend whiny rants don’t count. Do you not see how pathetic that is?

    • Do you not see how pathetic it is to consider the record high numbers of people who are unemployed and looking for work as non-contributors?

  18. Your'e an Ingrate permalink

    I do believe I shall notify this Jillian King and let her know that you have mentioned her by name.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: