It’s not important how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but rather why they are dancing at all.

In my hypothetical, the complained-of device (the document) BRIEFLY invites readers to ask themselves whether specific intent would have been worse than the willful recklessness that has resulted in America’s current social failures. Once its usefulness ended, I retired the device immediately.

What might seem moot and degrading to you has been instructional to others: that in the yin-yang of political discourse, a harmless detour into one’s heart is not necessarily moot. I chose Tom Clark because my harmless device would never dent the documented scandals that followed him throughout his career.

Even conservatives can enjoy the license that our freedoms of speech promote. I value your input and will consider your comments in the future.

Keep up the good fight!

Clark

First of all, I’m reluctant to believe the “authenticity” of you being a conservative as you doth protest too much.

Second, if you are, that’s terrific — but I fear you’re perpetuating the stereotype of us not having a sense of humor.

This essay is not a deception, as you lament. Instead, it’s a clever metaphor with a punchline. Unfortunately, you just missed it by jumping to conclusions.

If you need something more obvious, see here. Truth or fiction? (We took no chances of anyone questioning the authenticity)

Thanks for your continued readership.

Among recently discovered documents, university scholars have uncovered a blueprint that clearly states how this domestic war is being fought. Written in 1945 by former US Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark (1899-1977), it provides the strategy with which to defeat America from within.

Until authenticated any discussion of the content is moot. Reading your comments I now see that what was originally presented as authentic is later presented as “fake but accurate”. This is not open and honest debate and it is beneath you. How can conservatives break the leftist stranglehold on California politics if we resort to such deceptions when preaching to the choir? These communist conspiracy themes have been been published before in various essays based on predictions made in The Naked Communist. The predictions first published in 1962 were remarkably accurate.

If anyone read the post in its entirety, the authenticity of the document is revealed: i.e. “imaginary authenticity.”

As Clark Baker writes, “Had Thomas Clark actually published such a memo in 1945…”

These days, truth and fiction are hard to tell apart.

Anyone can write and circulate a transcript of a such a document. Even though it is interesting and substantiates some of my political beliefs the transcript has credibility comparable to a CBS TANG memo.

:-)

Is this supposed to be a genuine document or something that someone thinks old Judge Clark might have written given the chance. The post is dangerously ambiguous in that regard. I suspect it is something used to illustrate a point as opposed to historical original source material. For me, it does not pass the smell test.
If it is real, it is scary.
If it is apocraful, I really don’t think it’s use is a good idea. It smacks of the sort of paranoia our friends on the Left indulge in. Kind of creepy.
Anyway, sure would appreciate clarification.