Open Letter to America’s Writing Teachers

To:  America’s writing teachers

From:  Mitch Berg (BA, English)

Re:  Status Report

As my friend Joe “Learned Foot” Tucci notes over at the Kool Aid Report, it’s quite clear from this example that some of you really, really aren’t pulling your weight.

Seriously – we presume that most of the people writing the linked bilge are adults, right?  High school, if not college graduates?  They can’t even pull off “cutesy” and “smug” well.

Perhaps more surprising; given the demographics of most “counterculture” protesters, many of the perpetrators are likely private school grads.

This should be popping up on your performance reviews (presuming justice breaks out in this universe any time soon).

See to this, please.

That is all.

8 thoughts on “Open Letter to America’s Writing Teachers

  1. I see they are against Capitalism. Awwwww that’s cute. The little rich white kids are planning on moving to North Korea? Wonder if they mommies and daddies can mail them their allowances to there.

  2. To: Mitch Berg

    From: America’s Economy Teachers

    It is with no small bit of irony we note that you seem to have failed to grasp rather simple facts like supply and demand not being the only, and sometimes not even the chief, drivers of price. Regulation, market control, and vertical monopoly, combining with irresponsible spot market mechanisms, often drive price far beyond the material measures of simply supply vs. demand.

    To wit, your anemic pablum around drilling. Price today will not be materially impacted by any opportunities for a long, LONG time, yet you claim to be doing something about oil prices. We note, however, you gleefully (in the past) stood in opposition of further expansion of alternative energy initiatives, conservation, and pollution control. Now, you call for efforts which will not affect supply for many years, and have little to say about your past silence on better alternatives and corrections to supply, than just “oh, I suppose.”

    Indeed, while tapping the Strategic Oil Reserve is a simple band-aid on a gaping wound, it IS the only thing which might materially impact price, well, outside of a couple other things – and please note these.

    STOP threatening to attack Iran – while supply ISN’T currently interrupted, and so supply side pressure on price doesn’t truly exist (yet price still is $60 above fundamentals) – this agitation by the oil man you call George Walker Bush, is artificially inflating price dramatically (please see irresponsible spot market strategies above).

    Second, stop spending ludicrous amounts off-book on psuedo-‘greater wars on terror’ – in a nation where terrorism was not truly seated (i.e. Iraq). While things are improving there, the wasted Trillions have caused dramatic downward pressure on the value of the dollar. Again, this has little to do with either supply OR demand – you may want to note that – but instead has to do with charlitan fiscal policy posturing as a ‘conservative.’ We encourage you to consider that John (no change for your Big Mac) McCain, has no intention of changing this policy – so expect to pay more for your oil – despite any potential increase in supply in the distant future.

    Finally, and importantly, ANWR oil will not be even a 2% increase in WORLD supply, and oil, just an FYI here, is a world commodity where 96% of the increase in consumption is coming from (mostly) producing nations which are subsidizing the costs – again – not a supply issue, but rather an artificially heightened demand issue having little to do with basic supply/demand equations.

    As you may note, but we expect not, simplistic, foolish supply/demand references in these kinds of highly complex environments may salve the psyche of your readership, but like most subjects, subjects seemingly too deep for conservatives to grasp – the truth is far more challenging to fully pin down, and even more difficult to control. Large corporations and countries do everything possible to hide the nature and way they predict (and thus control) supply vs. demand and enable themselves to maximize profits.

    Please see to it.

    That is all.

  3. On the plus side: An attempt at cleverness, and a departure from your usual “I know you are but what am I” school of debate which, given the stultifying overkill, leaden oppressiveness and Yale-semiotics-professor level of unintelligibility of your usual comments, seems positively Waugh-ian by comparison. 

    On the minus side: The same thematic schizophrenia, inability to focus, stylistic inability (or timidity) to set, reinforce and conclude a thesis, and a reliance on pointillistic, obtuse strawmen (just because one doesn’t mention all possible factors in or permutations of a scenario in a comment doesn’t mean one is ignoring them!) in the absence of clear thought and measured rhetoric. 

    The overall effect is that of Fidel Castro trying to rewrite PG Wodehouse.

    C+ for effort, and your usual D- for execution.  At this point, I fear your comment GPA (0.6 out of a possible 4.0) is not going to be sufficient to ensure your graduation. 

  4. Mitch’s critique left out the obvious over reliance on cliche, which typifies this type of intellectual Onanism.

  5. I shall quote a famous speaker in the (vain) hopes that Penigma (other names too long and numerous to list here) might learn something.

    “…brevity is the soul of wit”

    You’re welcome.

  6. iv. Respect a diversity of tactics in the struggle for liberation. Do not solely condemn an action on the grounds that the State deems it to be illegal.

    iv. We oppose any state repression of dissent, including surveillance, infiltration, disruption and violence. We agree not to assist law enforcement actions against activists and others.

    So to sum up. They reserve the right to violate any law.
    And just for fun they throw in the most ironic possible statement opposing state repression blah blah blah, of exactly what they intend to do to the republicans at the convention. Amazing.

    “Finally, and importantly, ANWR oil will not be even a 2% increase in WORLD supply…” Do you know what sort of impact only 1% would have? Those are some weird ass economic teachers rejecting supply and demand as the building blocks at which price is determined. Public schools I imagine. Do you think the speculators bid up the price of oil and then store it in their garage to keep the price going up? It is the fear of reduced supply that keep those prices up. Should demand slump, the speculators are going to go broke. Should supply suddenly increase, same result. I think those economic teachers should study more and post less.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.