Am I really a standard bearer?

The blogpost is in letter correspondance style

This is a retort to an accusation almost: that I am the standard bearer of blog post writing in ES2007S. Faizal, the undertaker of the letter, and perhaps you beloved, will come to learn about such parochial views below.

Que lindo, Faizal!(You are so cute in espanol!)

I haven't flattered you as much as you did me, Faizal; so I should rightly be more surprised than you were with me. Haha!

But it bothered me greatly to know somebody called me the 'standard bearer' in blog writing; for supposing its truth, and after a long search high and low, I should long before had found a most commensurable posts of evidences to equal the requirement standard agreed: but that failed to materialize to form, good Faizal, which had been some way regretful; though given a choice, certainly was not a fault to bear for Brad or anybody else, and another, premature.

For supposing I were in fact a standard bearer: but in complete irony, no body had wrote to property as such, or literary gentle enough likewise; that would follow such a standard as none at all. I, therefore, couldn't have bore any less standard than I could have bore more indignity and lost of some sort of a functionable regarding self.

The standard, Faizal, that we both dutifully employ ourselves in; by which also we sought to apply to and  improve, to the better consequences than all in our company, eluded our grasp for such as to be visited only on terms of majority. For the law: might makes an antecedent condition of right; and majority designates a certain arrogant and mighty supremacy about it, comparable in proportionable terms, with 27 other souls of ES2007s'; versus only the pair or trio(including an Issac) of us, Faizal.

Given into majority; right, in all eventuality, and usually stripped of its very core idiosyncratic virtue then, rather got unexcited even apprehensive, at its being revised without a notice's change, to a majority's rite: which usually was never one to contain much things sanctifying, in the way intuitive to sacred undertakings, for being self-concerned to some restriction. It brought forth into sentience, instead, a sickening, and dire, and likely foreboding of its kind; in which rited right had ill a chance in forestalling, due to itself made unjust by majority's might: but failing any chance rited right answered to its true, virtuous, and striving call; appropriated instead, by majority (27 other ES2007S students) and overweened might who remained in the standard and defined it, its suboordination to might and majority remained as tacit, and indisputable, as the law vouched for it.

Voila Faizal!

Cheers