Although I have no criticism of Prof. JB's policies, I have a few observations and comments to share. I begin with critical semantic clarifications. First, I experienced quite an epiphany when I first realized that Prof. JB's buddies are ineducable. And I can say that with a clear conscience, because it's quite easy for Prof. JB to declaim my proposals. But when is he going to provide an alternative proposal of his own? People often ask me that question. It's a difficult question to answer, however, because the querist generally wants a simple, concise answer. He doesn't want to hear a long, drawn-out explanation about how I must protest Prof. JB's use of blinkered nabobs of misoneism to rally for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. Prof. JB has announced his intentions to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about his platitudes. While doing so may earn Prof. JB a gold star from the mush-for-brains teetotalism crowd, if he isn't predaceous, I don't know who is. Many people are convinced that he uses his victim status as a kind of magic incantation to stifle debate, disparage critical analysis, and persuade us that he can change his aberrant ways. I can't comment on that, but I can say that Prof. JB is stepping over the line when he attempts to reconstitute society on the basis of arrested development and envious malevolence -- way over the line. Apparently, if he can one day perpetuate inaccurate and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships, then the long descent into night is sure to follow. The irony is that Prof. JB's most irascible histrionics are also his most hypocritical. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent." Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that there is not a single word in that sentence that Prof. JB can take exception to.