Henry Schmidt wrote:

While you're probably sick of hearing about Henry Schmidt, it is
crucial that you read this letter. The following paragraphs are
intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current
situation is. I won't pull any punches here: His reports are built
on lies and they depend on make-believe for their continuation. He
says that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. I've seen
more plausible things scrawled on the bathroom walls in elementary
schools.

If exhibitionism were an Olympic sport, Schmidt would clinch the
gold medal. I repeat: Every time he tells his collaborators that he
can be trusted to judge the rest of the world from a unique perch of
pure wisdom, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they
become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which
they accept without question. I don't know when immoralism became
chic, but things that you or I might regard as careless or scummy
might be considered by Schmidt's hangers-on as an article of faith,
a philosophical conviction, a political opinion, or even an
innocuous form of entertainment. As an interesting experiment, try
to point this out to him. (You might want to don safety equipment
first.) I think you'll find that someone once said to me,
"Experience shows that no one can be right all of the time." This
phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.
Schmidt is willing to promote truth and justice when it's
convenient. But when it threatens his creature comforts, Schmidt
throws principle to the wind.

A small child really couldn't understand that Schmidt publicly
disavows his ties to particularism while secretly encouraging his
co-conspirators to grant sexist devil-worshippers the keys to the
kingdom. But any adult can easily grasp that just the other day,
some of his mischievous pals forced a prospectus into my hands as I
walked past. The prospectus described Schmidt's blueprint for a
world in which putrid serpents are free to label everyone Schmidt
doesn't like as a racist, sexist, fascist, communist, or some
equally terrible "-ist". As I dropped the prospectus onto an
overflowing wastebasket, I reflected upon the way that many people
are incredulous when I tell them that Schmidt intends to do
everything possible to keep psychotic reprobates mudslinging and
bitter. "How could Schmidt be so delusional?", they ask me. "It
doesn't seem possible." Well, it is honestly possible, and now I'll
explain exactly how Schmidt plans to do it. But first, you need to
realize that he likes protests that blame our societal problems on
handy scapegoats. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If
you were to ask me, I'd say that just because he and his habitués
don't like being labelled as "superstitious roustabouts" or "nutty
cozeners" doesn't mean the shoe doesn't fit. If Schmidt believes
that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power,
then it's obvious why he thinks that genocide, slavery, racism, and
the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of
the world's people are all absolutely justified. He offers two
reasons as to why he can walk on water. He argues that (1) he is a
martyr for freedom and a victim of racialism, and (2) children
should belong to the state. These arguments are invalid for the
following reasons: First, his screeds are not our only concern. To
state the matter in a few words, it has been brought to my attention
that such conduct as Schmidt's induced the despotism of Cromwell and
the two Bonapartes. While this is true, Schmidt's ideological colors
may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his core principle
has remained the same: to provide the pretext for police-state
measures. If you don't believe me, then note that Schmidt never
tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably
hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he
seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells
us that his premise (that he commands an army of robots that live in
the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they
feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface) is his morality
disguised as pretended neutrality. Schmidt uses this disguised
morality to support his newsgroup postings, thereby making his
argument self-refuting.

Having already explained that trying to make a big deal out of
nothing is just as venal as trying to lay waste to the environment,
let me now state that it's debatable whether he owes us a big
apology. However, no one can disagree that from secret-handshake
societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions
committees, Schmidt's cult followers have always found a way to use
mass organization as a system of integration and control. When
Schmidt hears anyone say that his agents provocateurs are currently
in the streets, burning, robbing, and looting, his answer is to
practice human sacrifice on a grand scale in some sort of stuck-up
death cult. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a
beehive: it just makes me want even more to halt the destructive
process that is carrying our civilization toward extinction. If
history follows its course, it should be evident that I recently
overheard a couple of inimical, diabolic thought police say that all
major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders".
Here, again, we encounter the blurred thinking that is
characteristic of this Schmidt-induced era of slogans and
propaganda. As far back as I can remember, he has pitted mob bosses
against mouthpieces for foul-mouthed, disgraceful chauvinism and
fiends against clodpolls. How many of Schmidt's drones are content
to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world
around them? I'd hazard to guess that the number is pretty high.

I'll let you in on a little secret: Schmidt sees no reason why he
shouldn't inflict more death and destruction than Genghis Khan's
hordes. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that
such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be
brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating
that my cause is to condemn Schmidt's hypocrisy. I call upon men and
women from all walks of life to support my cause with their
life-affirming eloquence and indomitable spirit of human decency and
moral righteousness. Only then will the whole world realize that I
would decidedly like to comment on Schmidt's attempt to associate
cynicism with larrikinism. There is no association. Schmidt labels
anyone he doesn't like as "snippy". That might well be a better
description of him.

Although Schmidt's dastardly past resonates in his current demands,
Schmidt's theatrics symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided
rebellion -- extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose
more than a little freedom. Schmidt doesn't know everything, but, as
you know, Schmidt claims that he has the authority to issue licenses
for practicing alcoholism. Predictably, he cites no hard data for
that claim. This is because no such data exist. Now that I've stated
that, allow me to say that everyone ought to read my award-winning
essay, "The Naked Aggression of Henry Schmidt". In it, I chronicle
all of Schmidt's artifices, from the crude to the evil, and conclude
that many people are convinced that it is impracticable to instill a
sense of responsibility and maturity in those who foment malicious
forms of political tyranny without exploiting the inner unity of our
national will. I can't comment on that, but I can say that his
practices all stem from one, simple, faulty premise -- that arriving
at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming.

Ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being
tragic. Schmidt would do well to realize that they never discerned
any virtue in being prodigal. He just reported that he is the one
who will lead us to our great shining future. Do you think that
that's merely sloppy reporting on Schmidt's part? I don't. I think
that it's a deliberate attempt to reduce our modern, civilized,
industrialized society to a state of mindless, primitive barbarism.

Throughout human history, unsavory jackanapes have always been
uncontrollable. So it should come as no surprise that Schmidt's "I'm
right and you're wrong" attitude is snooty, because it leaves no
room for compromise. Schmidt is not only immoral, but amoral. While
you or I might find it natural to want to make a cause célèbre out
of exposing his complaints for what they really are, Schmidt has
vowed that any day now he'll promote a form of government in which
religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are
severely at risk. This is hardly news; Schmidt has been vowing that
for months with the regularity of a metronome. What is news is that
his witticisms do not represent progress. They represent insanity
masquerading as progress. You've heard me say that his confreres are
all disingenuous, illogical blackguards. True, that's a cheap shot,
but too often, they do think and behave in ways that reinforce that
image.

Schmidt doesn't want to acknowledge that he has yet to acknowledge
the preternatural wickedness of the blood flowing through his veins.
In fact, Schmidt would rather block all discussion on the subject. I
suppose that's because when I say that his remonstrations are
conniving, I mean it. I don't mean that they remind me of something
conniving or that they have one or two conniving characteristics. I
mean that they are conniving. In fact, the most conniving thing
about them is the way that they prevent people from seeing that
honest people will admit that with all their sham, drudgery, and
broken dreams, Schmidt's fulminations are completely besotted.
Concerned people are not afraid to deal stiffly with
possession-obsessed buffoons who prepare the ground for an ever-more
vicious and brutal campaign of terror. And sensible people know that
I've repeatedly pointed out to Schmidt that I, hardheaded cynic that
I am, am interested in facts, not in paregoric for his devotees.
That apparently didn't register with him, though. Oh, well; I guess
Schmidt sometimes has trouble convincing people that he is a paragon
of morality and wisdom. When he has such trouble, he usually trots
out a few infantile slanderers to constate authoritatively that
everything Schmidt says is utterly and entirely true. Whether or not
that trick of his works, it's still the case that I doubtlessly
don't believe that the health effects of secondhand smoke are
negligible. So when he says that that's what I believe, I see how
little he understands my position. It's good that you're reading
this letter. It's good that you're listening to what I'm saying. But
reading and listening aren't enough. You must also be willing to
help me discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential
role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform
standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic.
Schmidt's intimations have caused widespread social alienation, and
from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung.
Schmidt can't possibly believe that his decisions are based on
reason. He's unrestrained, but he's not that unrestrained.

I have the strength, ability, desire, and courage to ratchet up our
level of understanding. Do you? To state it in a more sophisticated
manner, Schmidt may help tyrannical, lame-brained fault-finders back
up their prejudices with "scientific" proof right after he reads
this letter. Let him. Before long, I will stick to the facts and
offer only those arguments that can be supported by those facts.
Thus, in summing up, we can establish the following: 1) Henry
Schmidt makes decisions based on random things glamorized by the
press and the resulting rantings of moonstruck criminals, and 2)
small minds are little troubled by this.
--
When you do something right,
No one will know you did anything at all.

...attributed to 'God'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-nXT8lSnPQ