How to describe Sean Penn’s article?

I have been asked, rightly enough, to use obscene language a little less frequently on these pages. This is something which I have strived to do. But there’s a problem, because this morning I read an article written by the actor Sean Penn, about the ‘Malvinas/Falklands’ dispute, and cannot find any way in which I can avoid using the word ‘fuckwit’.

There are lots of words one can use to describe Mr Penn’s article, such as: self-regarding, self-important, meaningless, akin to the efforts of a not terribly bright eleven-year-old boy sticking a pin randomly into the pages of a slightly surreal dictionary, the final address at a debating society in a high security mental institution and so on — all of which are fine — but there is still something missing, and I am afraid that it is ‘fuckwit’. It needs to be there. Maybe the moderators should just asterisk it out, or something.

Anyway, here’s Sean’s piece. And below are some of my favourite chunks of verbiage from it. Why are these useless people ennobled with quasi-political office?

‘This is not a cause of leftist flamboyance nor significantly a centuries-old literary dispute. But rather a modern one, that is perhaps unveiled most legitimately through the raconteurism of Patagonian fishermen.’ ‘As a result, we must look to the mutual recognition of this illusive paradigm by both countries’ ‘The manifestation of the islands’ names themselves betrays a vague history written by victors and viscounts.’ ‘Let’s recap: the UK was indeed engaged in diplomatic resolution discussions with Argentina until the Argentinian people were themselves betrayed by their own leadership’s diversion, and the UK’s unfaltering support of a dictator who had live rats inserted into female genitalia and electric probes placed on the testicles of men in Chile simply because they had elected for a life, identity, and leadership of their own choosing.’