I have some very startling, very radical -- some might say confused -- insights into SCC's latest ultimata. Let's review the errors in SCC's statements in order. First, everything SCC writes is unreadably desultory. If SCC wants to be taken seriously, it should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. I need your help if I'm ever to offer true constructive criticism -- listening to the whole issue, recognizing the problems, recognizing what is being done right, and getting involved to help remedy the problem. "But I'm only one person," you might protest. "What difference can I make?" The answer is: a lot more than you think. You see, several things SCC has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of its that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance.

Since SCC claims to know more than the rest of us, I'm sure it is aware that once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that there is something grievously wrong with those garrulous so-called experts who advocate SCC's statements amid a hue and cry as spiteful as it is asinine. Shame on the lot of them! If you need proof that the doom-and-gloom, it's-too-late crowd always plays right into the hands of illiterate **** stars, then just take a look at SCC. There is a simple answer to the question of what to do about SCC's disquisitions. The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must let SCC know, in no uncertain terms, that its henchmen must be exposed and neutralized wherever they lurk. I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that SCC is up to, the more shocking things, things like how it wants to make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but it wants us to believe that tactless, inhumane deadbeats have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. How stupid does it think we are? Well, while you're deliberating over that, let me ask you another question: Why do its cringers want to ingratiate themselves with it? Now, not to bombard you with too many questions, but it says that anyone who disagrees with it is ultimately snippy. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. If you want to clear up these muddied waters with some reality, then tell everyone you know the truth, that my goal is to empower the oppressed to control their own lives. I might not be successful at achieving that goal, but I certainly do have to try.

So, SCC, maybe the problem is not with repressive dweebs, but with you. SCC can fool some of the people all of the time. It can fool all of the people some of the time. But it can't fool all of the people all of the time. Unquestionably, either SCC has no real conception of the sweep of history, or it is merely intent on winning some debating pin by trying to pierce a hole in my logic with "facts" that are taken out of context. "SCC" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone con us into believing that without SCC's superior guidance, we will go nowhere, I tell him or her to stop "SCC-ing". Finally, whatever your thoughts or feelings about SCC are, I urge you to help me prevent the production of a new crop of acrimonious, dour goofballs.