Disclaimer: This is satire and does not represent any political beliefs.
I wanted to respond to Mr. David Cameron earlier, but I was so busy, I simply did not have the time. Nevertheless, what I need to say is so important, I knew I simply had to allocate a few minutes to write a brief letter on the subject. Before I get moving here, let me point out that Mr. Cameron makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant’s mother. Consider, for example, Mr. Cameron’s claim that the average working-class person can’t see through his chicanery. The fact of the matter is that we can’t let pushy flakes ram his strictures down our throats. Well, that’s a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I’m afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: Some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with raving mythomaniacs on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to destroy all tradition, all morality, and the entire democratic system.
Okay, then, let’s move onto the really good part of this letter, the part in which I get to tell you that you might have heard the story that Mr. Cameron once agreed to help us suggest the kind of politics and policies that are needed to restore good sense to this important debate. No one has located the document in which Mr. Cameron said that. No one has identified when or where Mr. Cameron said that. That’s because he never said it. As you might have suspected, Mr. Cameron says that our country’s security, prestige, and financial interests are best served by war and the ever-present threat of war. You know, I don’t think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life.
When I’m through with Mr. Cameron he’ll think twice before attempting to fracture family unity. Although it requires risk, commitment, and follow-through to compile readers’ remarks and suggestions and use them to direct your attention in some detail to the vast and irreparable calamity brought upon us by Mr. Cameron, Mr. Cameron uses the word “ultraphotomicrograph” without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. People who are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated. The objection may still be raised that a richly evocative description of a problem automatically implies the correct solution to that problem. At first glance this sounds almost believable yet the following must be borne in mind: By refusing to act, by refusing to invite all the people who have been harmed by Mr. Cameron to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion, we are giving Mr. Cameron the power to numb the public to the communism and injustice in mainstream politics. When he made his puppy-dog flacks wag their little tails by promising to let them drag everything that is truly great into the gutter, I realized for the first time that Mr. Cameron has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, he’s intererested in rallying for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity. In contrast, my interests—and perhaps yours as well—include telling people that we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Mr. Cameron. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that Mr. Cameron coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his sophistries sound like they’re actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. I have one final message for you before ending this letter: Unforgiving cameralism is now and has long been a mainstay of Mr. David Cameron’s invectives.
