ridicule is all they need

ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.
— thomas jefferson

under the classical definition of dramatic irony, the victim of this literary device remains completely unaware of his own victimhood. irony is intended for the audience to savor ...

Ridicule Is All They Have
AS BLOGGERS AND ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CONTINUE TO UNCOVER THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA
by Dean C. Haskins, ©2011

(Jun. 27, 2011) — "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage." — Saul Alinsky

My friend Gary Wilmott called me yesterday, mostly just to vent. He had just called Tom Sullivan's Radio Show, wanting to discuss what was on his mind. When Sullivan's call screener came on the line, Wilmott asked, "Why are you discussing Obama's failed public policy in Libya and ignoring the number one issue in this country?" The screener gruffly responded with, "Oh? What's that?" "The fact that Obama released a forged birth certificate to the American people," Wilmott replied. The only response the screener could muster was, "Have you been in a coma for the past two months?" The conversation eventually ended with Wilmott promising to email him some of the mountains of evidence, which I'm sure Mr. Screener will studiously and impartially consider.

Is there any evidence that this document is authentic?

The media appears to have done their job so well. They have worked overtime to condition everyone in this country they can to believe that the first, and only, response to any valid question about Barack Obama's eligibility is ridicule. And, the shallow-minded sheeple have fallen into line. As Saul Alinsky pointed out, "It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule," however, we must embrace one word in that statement: almost. About the only thing short of physical violence that defeats ridicule is truth — and that's the one place where these folks don't want to go, for they know they have no defense against the facts. That's why they invariably attack the messenger — they know that they have no substantive argument against the facts.

Recently, I posted a letter I had written to two public officials, in response to their statements that demonstrated that very line of reasoning — that ridicule can somehow defeat the truth. I had planned to leave these arrogant fools, and move on to the next batch of buffoons, but a response I received from the official in Montana was so blatantly denigrating and pompous that my wife insisted that the world needs to see this person for who she is. I thought about it, and decided that everyone needs to be reminded how these non-arguments work, and how to combat them. Oh, and when your wife insists ...

Before we get to the more serious of the two offenders, let me share how it went with the more benign Arkansas character.

Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:33:31 -0500
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]

Dean,

I unsubscribed to not have to read this drivel ... now, you are still e-mailing me with it.

Please drop my name from your address book.

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:00:27 -0400

Senator Jeffress:

This is me not writing back to you.

Please rest assured that you are not, nor have you ever been, on any of my email lists. I simply emailed you directly because of your insipid commentary on my article that was emailed to you by somebody else.

Ignorance is sometimes an unavoidable consequence of circumstances; however, willful ignorance is purely volitional. You now have a choice. The evidence I have provided you (and, believe me, there is much, much more available) is irrefutable. You may no longer claim circumstantial ignorance, as the truth has been shared with you. If you choose to be willfully ignorant about this matter, then that will be nothing less than shameful.

Choose not to be a disgrace, Senator Jeffress.

For our Constitution,

Dean C. Haskins

P.S. Oh yeah, you might enjoy this: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37864

Subject: Re: your emails
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 19:09:11 -0500

Dean,

The reason I am even responding to this is to tell you and anyone else who have written articles and sent me e-mails is that as a state-level legislator in Arkansas, I have zero input on being able to have any impact on the situation. For anyone to think otherwise is the height of ignorance. Now leave me alone, please!

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:16:54 -0400

Senator Jeffress:

You're obviously not familiar with a little thing called the Constitution, then, for your statement is erroneous — especially in light of the Supreme Court's recent ruling on the 9th and 10th Amendments: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1227.pdf.

Also, the criminal code I cited applies to every citizen equally, and that includes state-level legislators in Arkansas.

So, I don't think I've yet reached the specific "height" you referenced. Do some reading, and maybe you won't either.

For our Constitution,

Dean C. Haskins

[snip]

Subject: Re: your emails
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:53:00 -0500

Do you always believe everything you read? Please slink back into your cave and do whatever it is that you do whenever you are lonely. I'm tired of your little game. I actually have a life ... a wife and family and I plan to spend the week-end in uninterrupted bliss with them. Your e-mail address is in the process of being permanently blocked from my receiving it. Good night.

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 23:08:55 -0400

Do you even read? Why are you so afraid of the evidence? Do you believe Major General Paul Vallely should slink back into his cave as well? How about the experts who have proclaimed the piece of trash computer image to be a forgery?

Only an imbecile would reject evidence before examining it.

Of course, I had a difficult time sleeping last night knowing that my email address was being permanently blocked from this Einstein's inbox. But, let me ask, do you see anywhere in his communication that he was willing to have a frank conversation about the evidence? Oh, sorry. He's probably reading this, and the word "frank" invariably makes him think about Anthony Weiner, and it brings a tear to his eye.

And now, on to the other brainwashed liberal elitist. It's so amusing that they consider themselves to be so intelligent, but are not capable of discussing something as elementary as evidence.

Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:36:59 -0600
From: [MT Rep. Robyn Driscoll]
To: dean@deanhaskins.com; [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: Re: your emails

You and your ilk are, as my much beloved Governor would say, "bat-**** crazy." If you would spend as much time on the deep issues facing our country as you do on your loony ideas and so-called "proof" of your utter nonsense, you could quite possibly make a difference. Ever gone to a school housing our low-income students and volunteered to help them with their reading skills? Ever participated in a fundraiser for people with severe illness who can't afford medical care? If you weren't so pathetic, you would be every bit as laughable as you find me and the Honorable Senator Jeffress. Take your energy (and obvious fabulous research skills ... yeah right) and put them to use in positive, progressive ways. You will feel much better about yourself and others may begin to look at you as a legitimate member of society. I'll look forward to hearing from you after your first growing experience.

Robyn

To: [MT Rep. Robyn Driscoll]; [AR State Senator Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:33:29 -0400

Representative Driscoll:

It's so amusing to see one vacuous liberal show that another vacuous liberal is an equally "deep thinker." Why am I not surprised that Governor Schweitzer's class reaches no higher than yours?

Apparently, to socialists like you, the Constitution doesn't qualify as a "deep issue," however there are multitudes of us out here who still regard it as the highest law in the land, and about the only thing that we have to try to keep political miscreants (read: liberals) from destroying our country. Barack Obama and his congregation have broken that law, and we will not be handily dismissed by anyone, let alone someone like you.

It is always so clear when someone is faced with evidence they cannot refute, for they will invariably attack the one who has presented the evidence to them. Let me reiterate — the evidence I presented you is irrefutable, regardless of the lies that you allow to lace your thought processes. But then, you wouldn't be a liberal if you didn't do that.

Your lofty sounding rhetoric sounds honorable, until one realizes that those "low-income students" are there largely because of tax and spend liberals like you; and, the moronic, unconstitutional health care legislation that was passed in the dark of night last year will simply make medical care that much harder to obtain for those "people with severe illness."

I do want to point out a glaring error in something else you said. Politically speaking, "positive" and "progressive" are actually mutually exclusive. Moreover, the rule of law in this nation is not based on how anybody feels about himself; and, I was born in this country to citizen parents, so I am a natural born Citizen, and that sufficiently makes me a legitimate member of society. Your warm and fuzzy feelings about me do not determine that.

As I just wrote Mr. Jeffress, "Ignorance is sometimes an unavoidable consequence of circumstances; however, willful ignorance is purely volitional. You now have a choice. The evidence I have provided you (and, believe me, there is much, much more available) is irrefutable. You may no longer claim circumstantial ignorance, as the truth has been shared with you. If you choose to be willfully ignorant about this matter, then that will be nothing less than shameful." I also urged him to choose not to be a disgrace.

However, it certainly appears that you are not only willfully ignorant, you are proudly ignorant, which makes you already a disgrace. I pray your political career is as insignificant as the depth of your intellect.

For our Constitution,

Dean C. Haskins

P.S. I shared this with your liberal friend, and you should enjoy it as well: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37864

Just like her Arkansas counterpart, she never once actually discussed the evidence, other than to ridicule the thought of it. Of course, when ridicule is met as the first response, it's sometimes fun to fight fire with fire, and reply in kind. However, we need to make sure that we only pepper the facts with ridicule, and not allow ridicule to be the entire basis of our argument; otherwise, we will be reduced to their incipient level.

When you're faced with this type of argument, keep these things in mind:

• Consider the source (it's not personal — they hate the truth in this)
• Always present the facts (there are innumerable resources available)
• Trust in the truth (in the end, the truth must prevail for America to exist)

By the way, I have purposely included the email addresses of Jeffress and Driscoll. Their comments were not directed primarily to me, for they don't know me. They were leveled at you as well. You might want to take a moment and let them know how you feel about being called "crazy idiots." I have a feeling they might not be so quick to respond the next time.

---

Dean Haskins is a freelance writer, professional musician/producer, and the former chairman of Restore the Constitutional Republic, one of the original "birther" organizations. He can be reached at dean@deanhaskins.com, and his blog is here.

© 2011, The Post & Email.

(emphases and redactions mine)

photoshop disaster

screenshot from this morning's new york times website:

yes, i'd be horrified too if the top and side of my head were blown away by some overworked intern ...

birthers on books

who says birthers can't read? ^[1]

concerned citizen youtuber LoneStar1776, who provided some post-conviction pizzazz to the wrap-up of december's birther court-martial, has returned to the limelight (as a federal "person of interest", most likely) with a review and a question for preemptively debunked conspiracy author jerome corsi:

alright — hey guys, i hope everyone is doin' well. this is rudy.

hey, uh, see this book here? where's the birth certificate by jerome corsi? y'see that? ok, um, i've started to read it, i haven't read the whole thing yet. um, one thing i noticed, is that, uh, i looked in the index — i don't see lt. col. terry lakin's name. i don't see pastor james david manning's name. i don't see walter, ah, fitzpatrick, cmdr. walter fitzpatrick. i don't see cmdr. kerchner. i do see orly taitz and phil berg, which are two, uh, lawyers and so that's a good thing and i'm not here to get on jerome corsi's case, but ... y'know the title of this video is are you willing to die?, right, and that's what it's gonna take and so i hope jerome corsi is willing to die. because that's obviously what's it's gonna take to bring the tu— truth out in the atmosphere that we have today.

and a lot of people have asked me and i know a lot of you people, uh, like trump and quite a few of you people don't like trump. and so, you have to ask yourself, y'know — trump pushed the issue — he obviously released a forged, fraudulent piece of crap. anybody that knows anything about computers knows that that, uh, adobe pdf document is not a scan of a real document, that it's a computer-generated fraudulent piece of junk, right? but people have asked me what do i think about trump? well, trump did push the issue and he was very bold so there's only, there's one of two things: either he was in on it, right — that's one possibility, i dunno the man's heart — one possibility is that trump was in on it and that, uh, y'know, he's been promised some big payoff like he gets to built his casino somewhere, y'know, he gets some kind of government, uh, okay or whatever. i don't know what the big deal is with buildin' a casino somewhere, but let's just say that that was a possibility, that he was in on it and now he gets to build a casino.

the other option is — that they threatened him, right? that he actually was threatened. okay, either one of those options. either one of those options, whether he was in on it, right, or he was threatened ... i don't like donald trump. the reason i don't is, when he pushed the issue, to the point, uh, y'know, and, and got, and he took, took up the mantle and he stood on the backs of giants. he stood on the back of pastor james david manning. he stood on the back of lt. col. terry lakin. he stood on the back of orly taitz. he stood on the back of phil berg and he became, uh, the flag-bearer, for the birth certificate and the constitutional eligibility bearers. when donald trump did that, he shoulda been willin' to die. and if he was threatened and he backed off, then he's no leader of mine.

so, if he, if he's in on it, he's total scum, he needs to be hung, until dead, from the nearest tree, and if he was threatened and he backed off, he's still scum, because he shoulda been willin' to die.

now many of you people will say, "well, it's easy for you to get behind a youtube camera and to play mr. tough guy." and i would agree with you. it's easy for people to get behind youtube cameras and to play mr. tough guy. uh, but i would just offer for your consideration: it's up to you to discern whether somebody's bein' truthful or not. and i would offer that pastor james david manning has been at this for three years and i know, just from my association with him and following him that pastor james david manning is willin' to die and i would feel a whole lot more comfortable with pastor james david manning being the flag-bearer for the constitutional eligibility issue and also the, uh, birther issue. i would feel much more comfortable with him in the driver's seat, rather than this corsi guy.

is, is corsi a good guy? is he willin' to die? uh, i hope he is, because that's what it's gonna take. has he wroten a book and prost — and uh, progressed the issue? yes, and i thank doc, uh, dr. jerome corsi. i thank him for that. right? but i ain't gonna bow down to him if he's not willin' to die.

uh, we got people that are being deployed by a, uh, leader and a, ah, leader and thief, right? a constitutionally ineligible president that is the head of our military. that's deployin' our military around and engaging them in activities, and he's not even constitutionally eligible to be president. and, and, and, when you go, uh, address somethin' like that, you better, you better have it fixed in your heart and you better know with 100 percent certainty that you're right and you better be willin' to lay your life down.

and if you're not willin' to lay your life down, then get the hell outta the way and let somebody step up to the plate who is willin' to do what it takes and to risk what it takes, and to put their life on the line to do what's right! that's what i gotta say about that!

and if jerome corsi, if he's gotta, if he's got the heart for it, and he's, he's, and he's willin' to fight the fight, then i applaud him and i thank him. but if he's gonna back down when they threaten him, or if they threaten his family, then i'm asking jerome corsi to get the hell outta the way! GET THE HELL! OUT! OF! THE WAY! AND LET SOMEBODY GET UP TO THE MICROPHONE THAT'S WILLIN' TO DIE! THAT'S WILLIN' TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT! THAT'S WILLIN' TO, UH, TO RISK ALL THEIR TREASURE! ALL OF THEIR LIFE! ALL OF THEIR FRIENDS! TO BE RIDICULED IN THE MEDIA AND TO TELL THE TRUTH! AND JEROME CORSI, IF YOU'RE THAT MAN, I WILL APPLAUD YOU AND I WILL THANK YOU! BUT IF YOU'RE NOT THAT MAN, GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY AND LET PASTOR JAMES DAVID MANNING UP TO THE PLATE! LET CMDR. KERCHNER UP TO THE PLATE! LET, LET, LET LT. COL. TERRY LAKIN UP TO THE PLATE! BECAUSE THESE MEN WILL RISK EVERYTHING THEY GOT! AND I HOPE JEROME CORSI IS THE MAN OF HEART AND OF COURAGE AND OF TRUTH! AND IF HE'S NOT, THEN I WILL SPIT ON HIM BECAUSE HE IS A PIECE OF SHIT!

that's all i gotta say about that! god bless every one of ya and my question, my question to jerome corsi is: are you willin' ta die?

---

[1] ok, like most folks, i may have said as much, to someone, somewhere ... somewhat often.

waiting for OMGodot

---

dedicated to "squeeky":

i listened to the interview and it was certainly interesting. but i am starting to get that feeling i get when i watch destination truth or ghost hunter on TV. you know when they are out looking for werewolves in minnesota and right before the commercial somebody hollers OH MY GOD!!!

then you stick around through the commercial to see if they found the werewolf or big foot or whatever they are hunting for and when it comes back on, somebody tripped over a log or something or there was raccoon in the bush.

or if it’s ghost hunter the "spirit orbs" turns out to be dust reflecting lights. sooo, i hope if corsi* has something good, he gets it out in a hurry and doesn’t make this last through another few books or something. because i am not sure my heart can take all this.

* jerome corsi, shameless peddler of stillborn expose where's the birth certificate?

and acknowledgments to ray bradbury, whose title i stole from his 1951 short story about existential doubt — an astronaut loses his confidence in evidence or memory, his sense of object permanence, his belief in his own existence and, ultimately, his life:

i don't believe in anything i can't see or hear or touch. i can't see earth, so why should i believe in it?

... when i'm in boston, new york is dead. when i'm in new york, boston is dead. when i don't see a man for a day, he's dead. when he comes walking down the street, my god, it's a resurrection. i do a dance, almost, i'm so glad to see him. i used to, anyway. i don't dance any more.

... you have no mental evidence. that's what i want, a mental evidence i can feel. i don't want physical evidence, proof you have to go out and drag in. i want evidence that you can carry in your mind and always touch and smell and feel. but there's no way to do that. in order to believe in a thing you've got to carry it with you. you can't carry the earth. or a man, in your pocket. i want a way to do that, carry things with me always, so i can believe in them.

... there was always that gap of proof. that gap between doing and having done. what is done is dead and is not proof, for it is not an action. only actions are important. and pieces of paper were remains of actions done and over and now unseen. the proof of doing was over and done. nothing but memory remained, and i didn't trust my memory. could i actually prove i'd written these stories? no. can any author?

however, unlike the doomed astronaut, birthers aren't actually sincere in their endless demands for "evidence"; they simply hide behind such claims in order to deny the results of the 2008 election.

a day in june

as enjoyed by howard cruse in the june 1984 edition of heavy metal magazine: