I am highly critical of those who tolerate or apologize for people who work with Mr. D'Allesandro. That sounds really lousy, but I indisputably maintain that it's an accurate assessment of the situation. Contrast, for example, his refrains with those of the most petty busybodies you'll ever see, and observe that there is no contrast. I, by (genuine) contrast, take the view that his jokes are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because he claims that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. Well, I beg to differ.
When was the last time you heard Mr. D'Allesandro mention that I have resisted taking legal action against him, as others have advised me to do? Probably never. That's why he has stated that he is known for his sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends. That's just pure pessimism. Well, in Mr. D'Allesandro's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that you should not ask, "Why can't Mr. D'Allesandro value a diversity of approaches without needing to rank them as better and worse?", but rather, "How long shall there continue antihumanist doomsday prophets to vend and ribald champions of deceit, lies, theft, plunder, and rapine to gulp so low a piece of incendiarism as Mr. D'Allesandro's hatchet jobs?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because I recently heard Mr. D'Allesandro tell a bunch of people that going through the motions of working is the same as working. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. What I had wanted for this letter was to write an analysis of Mr. Joe D'Allesandro's mottos. Not a exhortation or a shrill denunciation, but an analysis. I hope I have succeeded at that.