lid wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Wayne Harrison wrote:

the repitition of excess only softens its impact.

There's nothing excessive about referring to Chester the Molester
as a filthy piece of human garbage.

Perhaps you might want to change Molester to Despoiler? ...

No, I don't think so.

From Webster's:

1 : to annoy, disturb, or persecute especially with hostile intent or
injurious effect

So, besides being technically accurate, (Chetser the Molester *IS*
in fact a molester), he is worse than a child molester. A child
molester damages only those children in his sphere. Chester would
destroy the best legacy we could ever leave to many thousands of
children and he does it just for jollies.

Scum like Chester are persona non grata even among decent motorheads
who do their vroom, vroom thing legally and don't appreciate the
black eye given to their "pastime" by those who don't.

--
Ken Fortenberry