(alternately titled -
today's lesson iz
addressing categorical imperative)
Courtesy of unpleasant he
ping diatribes visited me
from eldest offspring ugh gree
guss vituperations, doth force me
to admit (and take key
lock, stock, and barrel
lamentations to heart), that she
(Eden Liat) didst
perceive (hence nee),
interpret as her reality
regarding my actions,
intents, words, et
cetera men knee
instances of objectionable
dealing with situations
of mine mien to thyself
(lamely, meekly, and nervously
pleading being oblivious),
nonetheless purportedly untoward
fatherly behavior, said kin recoils
in reaction to extremely re:
pulse sieve, no matter,
whether paternal behavior
of mine unintentional (see
ming lee) find
ding total unawareness
as poor excuse, which does not
hold candle box
three doors down, nor
bankable, dutiful guarantee
hence this papa, heed decree,
his displeasing, now accepting
onerous task of child rearing
inflicted hurtful affects asper,
mismanaging challenges
as legal guardian,
and thus grievously, honestly,
and readily attests averse
to hold a mirror be
fore my person as
proof positive aware
ness, and accept,
how I usurped carte blanche
(parental role, no
matter honest intentions,
sans welfare of daughters)
unknowingly shamefacedly interpreted
as unflattering about me
whom ***** nilly
bandied authoritarian free
reign (and/or rein)
recounting mine foibles, viz
despite my best intentions,
impressions, and iterations
as even handed sues err un tee
I mint jewel
lip succoring (suzerainty)
spurring the conundrum,
que who, what,
and how does one pre
sent lee define
true intentions, and whether
neutral stance can be cree
jewel less lee codifies, si?
