Re: Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding...

Well, that brings up an interesting exchange with a writer friend.

TR: OMG http://youtu.be/EgVIei87oFo Major Mistake by the White House
JC: For the sake of argument, that proves what, exactly?
TR: It proves that this is a forged document backed up on national
television by the President of the United States. It proves that there is a
conspiracy being enacted by the President and others including an official
in Hawaii. It's indefensible. And even if I liked President Obama, I could
not sanction this disregard for Constitutional requirements.

I liked President Bush once upon a time until I realized that the Patriot
Act was an attack on our liberty and the erosion of everything this country
stands for.

Believe me, it's a lot harder being awake.

I swallowed the red pill... I can't go back now--I don't want to go back.
But I understand why some would rather remain uninformed about the things
that are going on. It's quite a burden really.

JC: Actually, it doesn't. It only proves that the document you opened has
layers. It doesn't prove that this document was forged.

Mark Belling has a couple of observations for things like this: 1)
rationalization is the 2nd strongest human impulse, and 2) people will
believe what they want to believe.

The only thing this proves is that there are layers in the document, and
there's a plausible explanation right there in the YouTube thread:
"It's called OCR (optical character recognition). Acrobat and many scanners
do this by default. It detects letters and words on the page and allows you
to add selectable text to the document without having to type it in
manually.

Notice how when you hide a layer, it's white behind it? If it was truly
forged, you wouldn't see any of the background missing. It's white because
it doesn't know what's behind the text BECAUSE THE TEXT WAS THERE WHEN IT
WAS SCANNED."

The thread devolved from there.  ;)

Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |*
*


On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> I understand the Birther concerns. Their concerns have finally been
> addressed.
>
> Finally?  *Again*, the short form certificate of live birth released a
> couple of years ago met the requirements both legally and Constitutionally.
> Anyone who was genuinely just concerned on that front should have been
> satisfied.  The people who were not?  Clearly had goals other than making
> sure the Constitution was upheld.  Of course, all yesterday did was
> re-affirm what had already been proven.  And people are still contesting
> it.  So, I am rather cynical on the whole portrayal of birthers as "just
> concerned citizens."  All the birthers I know hate the president and all are
> looking for anything to use against him.
>
>  Thom
> http://thomwade.wordpress.com/
> http://www.cafepress.com/Thomwade
> http://www.in-one-ear.com
> _______________________________________
> "I want a song to learn and sing, of a life requited."-Echo & the Bunnymen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johne Cook <[email protected]>
> To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thu, Apr 28, 2011 9:48 am
> Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding...
>
> I find all this incredible. There was no racist overtones to the Birther
> questions I was hearing until the media brought that up. Now, it's like a
> self-perpetuating meme, Birther=racists. We've seen this before with Tea
> Party = racists. It's a tired tactic.
>
> I understand the Birther concerns. Their concerns have finally been
> addressed. However, one presumes because of using this as a political chip,
> instead of nipping something in the bud by addressing it immediately, the
> President did choose to wait YEARS to produce the document. While I think
> the Birthers were silly to begin with, I also think (as a pragmatist) that
> the President intentionally brought much of this on himself by stringing it
> along, and has now created a culture of distrust and cynicism from what
> started as a little healthy skepticism. Both sides deserve each other by
> this point. I wash my hands of all of them.
>
> Johne Cook
> | http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |*
> *
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:41 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  >Seriously how do *you* know someone is a racist, especially when they
>> deny they are?
>>
>>  When some traffics in negative stereotypes based on race and speaks of
>> people of other races as inferior?  I'd call that being racist.
>>
>>  Thom
>> http://thomwade.wordpress.com/
>> http://www.cafepress.com/Thomwade
>> http://www.in-one-ear.com
>> _______________________________________
>> "I want a song to learn and sing, of a life requited."-Echo & the Bunnymen
>>
>>
>> --
>> dadl-ot mailing list
>> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
>>
>
>  --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.ushttp://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
>
>
> --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
>

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot