Pressurised Sarcasm Explosion

My present essay drafts seem to indicate that my primary defence mechanism, insofar as academic stress is concerned, is rampant sass.  This is not in any way a surprising finding.  Thus:

"[X]'s arguments are, strictly speaking, wishy-washy."

"A choice between being treated like a zoological specimen and being informed that one's sexual orientation is a culturally constructed fiction which (Please Stand By) will shortly be phased out can scarcely be described as the provision of an attractive set of alternatives."

"[Y]'s metaphors pine for the proverbial fjords."

"The fact that Ed and Elaine Brown sign court orders with 'Edward, Living Soul In The Body Of The Lord', broadcast death threats to judges and believe themselves victims of a Zionist Illuminati Freemason conspiracy should not blind us to the possible legitimacy of their liberatarian opinions about taxes."

"The existence of these dichotomies is the fundamental proof of the argument, but knowing exactly what they are is not, at the moment, the point."

"...rights are inalienable, with the exception of situations in which they are freely relinquished.  Thus, if a farmer decides to cede his territorial claim to a piece of land to the Heritage Council so as to aid the flourishing of the Rare Blue-Collar Springsteen-Warbling Pelican...'

"This is perhaps best exemplified by the poets' use of the word 'but'".

"The notion that we have any obligation to provide welfare for others is contingent upon our beliefs about societal responsibilities in relation to individual rights... It is not contingent, as is proposed in [Z]'s paper, upon the natural human impulse to huddle together in groups singing Kumbaya."

Mentions of the word 'schizophrenia': 2 (two different essays)

Mentions of the word 'paradigm': 8

Mentions of the phrase 'tenuous link': 4 (once per essay)

Insults to Australian literature: Many

Mentions of the word 'stoat': None as yet (but it's early days).