According to Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) I am a baldheaded man who sports a ponytail. Or I'm a man with a large bald spot on the top of my head with long hair on the sides that I pull back into a ponytail.
Dennis Marks: Rusty... you get a free pass to call WD, with his ponytail "baldheaded". Whether or not he is in fact bald. (9/13/2014 AT 8:12am).
Ah, no Dennis. Rusty originally referred to YOU as bald with a ponytail.
Rusty Shackelford: I think I'd lay about 5-1 that either dmarks or WD are one of those bald headed gray haired guys that have a pony tail. You know the kind of guy that other guys laugh at. (12/26/2011 AT 3:30pm).
In response, Dennis wrote the following...
Dennis Marks: "...bald headed gray haired guys that have a pony tail..."
Rusty Shackelford: Yep dmarks, confirmed... its you... the middle aged bald guy with the pony tail. Bad look buddy, bad look. And please, dump the Dockers. The other guys are snickering at you. (12/26/2011 AT 8:26pm).
Rusty confirmed that he believes Dennis is the bald man with a ponytail. Initially he said it was either me or Dennis, then he CONFIRMED it was Dennis (in his mind). Yet ever since then Dennis has repeated (a number of times) that *I'm* a baldheaded dude with a ponytail. Or that I have a ponytail (without mentioning the "bald" part).
Anyway, I'm with Rusty on this one. In that I believe that it is likely that Dennis is a bald man with a ponytail, and that him ignoring Rusty's conclusion that Dennis has the ponytail (and bald head) is projection.
How likely this is... that is another matter. The likelihood is probably low. More likely is that Dennis simply liked the insult (originally aimed at him as well as me), so he ignored Rusty's "confirmation" and started using the "insult" against me. With no evidence to back up the accusation... at all.
For the record, I am not bald. No bald spot either, nor receding hairline or ponytail (which I've never had).
In any case, regardless of whether or not Dennis is a baldheaded guy with a ponytail, I give myself a free pass to believe Dennis is the kind of guy that other guys laugh at... for being typically off his gourd in regards to his political views. In regards to that I say, "yep dmarks, confirmed... it's you who is the middle-aged guy with political views that are totally nuts".
He might also be mostly bald and sport a ponytail. Although, if he was embarrassed by Rusty pegging him in regards to his "look"... he might have cut the ponytail off.
3/3/2016 Update: dmarks (in a 1/17/2015 comment I just stumbled across) makes an admission that confirms my suspicions... dmarks: did you know that I'm a baldheaded ponytailed moron? (No joke, dmarks wrote it. Follow the link if you don't believe me).
Image:I've heard that Dennis enjoys getting attention by flashing strangers in parks. Could this picture be a shot of the sicko engaging in this perverted behavior?
Supporting Document
Bald Men With Ponytails, DSD #4. (A catalog of Dennis Marks comments concerning bald headedness and bald men who sport ponytails).
Awhile ago Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) revealed himself to have a sick obession known as fecalphelia, which (with Dennis) takes the form of him referring to my comments on other blogs as "defecation" and filtering out these "floaters" (my remarks) as "flushing". In another comment re removing my comments Dennis tells the blog host that "it is time to wipe". (a reference, yet again, to a toilet function).
In another comment that is even more disgusting Dennis says "WD is blowing shit out of his mouth". Sick, right? But that isn't the end of Dennis' many sicknesses.
In addition to his fecalphelia, Dennis is a confirmed phallophile, which (with Dennis) takes the form of an obsession with "weinergrams" and the delusion that I have sent him such images (photos of my genitalia), which I absolutely NEVER have.
This same phile has Dennis picking up on another blogger's use of the word "beef" (re the "feud" between dmarks and I) and using it in another connotation. One that reveals where his obsessions lie.
Dennis Marks: Mr Sanders' link to to his fanboy blog proves nothing more than his mancrush obsession, as he failed to find any lies to call me out for. His "long standing beef" is still hanging out. (4/10/2015 AT 7:38am).
The "fanboy blog" that Dennis refers to is THIS blog. He thinks my criticisms of him here amount to me being his "fan".
In any case, in reply to this comment in which Dennis imagines a "man crush" that does not exist, I said "you're imagining my beef hanging out RIGHT NOW, aren't you? I think dmarks needs to find himself a boyfriend".
It is comments like these have led me to believe that Dennis might be a closeted gay man. (probably self-hating).
Which brings me to the comment that caused me to believe that Dennis might be doing something inappropriate with his gun. Should he own one. Previously he indicated that he did not own one, but was thinking about making a purchase (from a gun show or private seller... so the government was unaware of his acquisition).
It was in the following comment where his phallophilia and gun nuttery collided, although (of course) he (again) projected his sick obsessions onto me. (Note: Comment by another blogger included, as what Dennis sez is in response to it).
This comment, in which Dennis sez I have an "irrational aversion to weapons" (the definition of "holophobia") and sez I am also a phallophile, did not last long. Dennis quickly deleted it... likely because he realized it said more about his own obsessions than it said anything about the proprietor of this blog.
I was able to pull up the Google cached page and grab a screenshot, however. A screenshot that I have appended to the end of this commentary. (Note: Google cached pages are regularly updated, so the link I just gave may or may not show the deleted comment. It depends on how much time has passed between the date of the publication of this post and when you click the link).
In regards to the Jersey McJones comment... I think he makes a very good point. Which is that many of these gun nuts may be making up for an "equipment" deficiency with a big gun. A desire that presents itself as an obsession with, and a need to possess one or many guns.
Now, on the blog where this exchange took place, Libertas and Latte, the blog host focuses almost exclusively on defending gun rights against (what he calls) the "the gun control cabal".
Referencing the Jersey comment, the proprietor of the Latte blog (a blog where there are zero commentaries about coffee and only the "libertas" for anyone to as many guns as they desire) makes the same connection I just made (a connection between how some nutters might view firearms in a "homoerotic" light).
Constitutional Insurgent: ...the gun control camp cannot seem to proffer an argument without invoking laughable memes and buzz phrases about the "eeeevil NRA" or odd homoerotic projections comparing firearms to the phallus... (7/30/2015 AT 7:40am).
Homoerotic you say? All I've heard is that a gun might substitute a for straight man's insecurity regarding their manhood. But Latte's mind goes to "homoerotic". Maybe he's talking about himself without knowing it? Who knows?
I do know that Dennis has made many comments in the past that indicate to me that he may be a closeted gay man. In another comment on another blog Dennis said (referring to me) "he loves to compose graphic lube-dripping gay-sex comments". However this reference to something I've never done is (I think) more projection.
In fact it seems that lubing up that area (so something can be inserted) is an act that is on Dennis' mind constantly. In another discussion Dennis levied a bogus charge of anti-semitism against the Occupy movement based on a YouTube video starring someone who calls himself "Lotion Man". Dennis provided a link to this video in his comment, and I therefore assumed that he had looked at it and knew the "anti-semite" he was referring to called himself "Lotion Man".
However, when I responded to Dennis' comment linking to the Lotion Man video, he responded back with a comment that made it clear he had no idea who "Lotion Man" was. Even though this was the dude making the anti-semitic comments. In a video that Dennis linked to. Instead he assumes (when I refer to Lotion Man) that I'm talking about something else.
Dennis Marks: I have no idea about Mr. Sander's lotions. It's probably something perverted again, and I don't want to think about it. (2/1/2014 10:28:00 PM EST).
So why does his mind go there? Frankly I think it's because Dennis was (again) imagining my "beef". Imagining my "beef" with lotion on it and me inserting it somewhere Dennis would find pleasurable. Which, if that's Dennis' thing, is OK (or none of my business). Although I've informed him previously that it isn't MY thing and that he should stop including me in his fantasies. I mean, he CLEARLY was thinking about it, as that is where his mind went immediately. Despite the fact that I was talking about the subject in the video HE LINKED TO!
So... did Dennis finally realize that his fantasies regarding yours truly were just that... fantasies that were never going to happen? And did Dennis then look elsewhere to fulfill his needs? Clearly (being in the closet) he was too embarrassed to go looking for a boyfriend.
Instead (to fulfill these desires) he uses a gun instead of a dildo? I think so. I think Dennis' gun became an object of sexual attraction and he wanted his gun to "do" him. I conclude this based on the evidence as laid out above.
Obviously it would be better for Dennis if he came out of the closet and found himself that boyfriend he wants. Better because there wouldn't be a danger of him firing a bullet up his ass.
I assume he sticks his gun up his poop shoot with the safety OFF (and his finger on the trigger) because he finds the excitement of possibly killing himself necessary in order to climax.
I could be wrong... but I think there is a very strong case that Dennis is engaging in this exceedingly risky behavior. The gun-obsessed Latte man alludes to the "homoerotic" act, although I'm sure he does so with no thought in his mind about Dennis defiling his firearm in this manner. Even though that might very well be exactly what Dennis is doing.
Video: "You can go on YouTube and find me, The Lotion Man", the subject of this video says (near the end). This is the Clip that shows "Anti-Semitism at Occupy Wall Street Protest"... which Dennis thinks proves the entire movement is anti-Semitic (2:20).
According to a report from Rawstory, the Klan does not view itself as a racist organization.
"We don't hate people because of their race. I mean, we're a Christian organization", Frank Ancona, an Imperial Wizard of the Traditional American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, told WWBT on Thursday. (Virginia KKK Leader: We're Not Racist, We're Just Misunderstood Christians by Karoli. Crooks and Liars, 4/15/2014).
This is quite similar to how Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) views himself. As I have demonstrated on this blog, Dennis holds tightly to some seriously racially biased beliefs, yet he considers himself not to be racist at all. In fact, he frequently attacks other bloggers for their "racism". This, BTW, always involves the person being attacked standing in opposition to the racism of Dennis!
This is known as psychological projection, which, according to Wikipedia, is "a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others". Anna Freud said that "in projection thoughts, motivations, desires, and feelings that cannot be accepted as one's own are dealt with by being placed in the outside world and attributed to someone else. What the ego repudiates is split off and placed in another".
Dennis engages in this kind of projection VERY frequently. For example, another blogger who went by the ID John Myste mixed it up with Dennis in regards to Affirmative Action. And, because this Myste guy dared to defend it, he was branded the "Grand Wizard of the Myste" by the delusional Dennis!
This exchange took place on the blog of the Libertarian Willis Hart, an individual I used to think wasn't all that racist (although I have since reconsidered). This likely explained why Willis said nothing when Dennis lied about John Myste being "racist". Which is why John Myste left the Hartster's blog. He got fed up with the lying of Dennis and called it quits. I haven't seen him since (and his blog has been inactive since then as well).
So he's gone, and has been since 11/5/2012, yet Dennis continues to refer to Myste on the blog of Willis Hart by accusing him of racism that was never exhibited.
Dennis Marks: One could always buy the John Myste argument on African Americans: that they are less capable, damaged beings that are below the mark, and can't compete on a level playing field. Myste's argument was nasty and demeaning, but isn't too far afield from much of the argument in favor of "affirmative action" quotas/goals/time tables/etc. No, I do not buy into the Myste argument of black inferiority. (5/11/2015 AT 2:07pm).
But John Myste never made any argument at all concerning "black inferiority". This is a complete fabrication by the projecting Dennis. What he said that, as a race, African Americans have been subjected to oppression and not afforded opportunities to advance.
John Myste: Saying that we insult blacks when we say they were unable to compete after the oppression had done its job, is a lie. Honest whites say this and blacks say this. All people who are denied education, segregated into the worst parts of a society, and written off by that society, are unable to compete with those who were given opportunity, education and respect: regardless of skin color. (10/18/2012 AT 7:41am).
Myste never said Blacks are "inferior". He said they were not afforded the same opportunities and that Affirmative Action is necessary to fix that problem. Or was. For the record, Myste also said "I don't support most AF policies. I consider them divisive at best and unduly racist at worst".
So, he was only speaking of the need to do something and not supporting any and all Affirmative Action policies. Which Dennis says he agrees with. Or he says he agrees with "the JFK version", which (according to Willis Hart) contained "no preferences or quotas at all, just a commitment to make certain that those group that had been discriminated in the past would no longer be discriminated against in the future".
OK, but did it work? Perhaps the quotas were added when it was noticed that discrimination was still taking place and that the number of African Americans being afforded opportunities was not increasing that much? I mean, I haven't researched it, but it makes sense. We're talking about the force of law backing up an effort to make sure a certain number of African Americans are afforded opportunities versus a SUGGESTION that an effort be made (with no indication at all regarding what such an effort might look like in terms of numbers).
Suggestions can be ignored and excuses made to justify very little being done, after all. A justification might be that no qualified African Americans presented themselves for consideration. So do we accept the status quo of nothing being accomplished despite a suggestion, or do we FORCE the issue with quotas? I say we go with the quotas because otherwise no progress will be made.
This, I believe, is why people like Willis and Dennis support the "suggestion to be ignored" version of Affirmative Action. Because they don't really agree with the notion that African Americans should be afforded opportunities that were previously denied them. Due to their racial biases. Just suggest it and sit back while the suggestion is ignored and the status quo that favors Whites like them is maintained.
How else do you explain comments like the following?
Dennis Marks: John even implied that Barack Obama isn't qualified for anything by saying that he wouldn't have gotten anywhere without affirmative action quotas... a man would would not have prevailed or succeeded if held to the same standards as anyone else. John is one of the most empassioned liberal racists I've ever met. His reasons for claiming that blacks are inferior is because they are damaged by history. That's different of course than claiming they are genetically inferior. But either "argument" would make a Klansman smile. (5/14/2015 AT 4:37am).
But the above characterization of Myste's comments bear very little resembelance to what he actually said.
John Myste: Obama earned his position. It was not donated via AF. However, if not for policies like AF, neither he, nor any in his race, would likely be able to compete, and it would have nothing to do with anything inherent to his race, and would have everything to do with the oppression (damage) white America did to his race and did not undo when given the change. AF undoes that damage. We robbed blacks of education, opportunity, and the ability to gain skills and knowledge. Replacing what we robbed is not racism. (10/18/2012 AT 7:41am).
Don't actually force anyone to do anything. Just suggest they do it and be satisfied when very little progress is made. And if anyone dares to say that's not good enough or point out it isn't working? Dennis will call you an "empassioned liberal racist" (He means against Whites).
Anyway, notice the dates... Dennis is referring to a comment from Myste that is over 2 and a half years old! So what explains Dennis' fetish with the long-departed John Myste? I'm convinced it's because, subconsciously he knows he's a racist and the ONLY way he can drown out these unpleasant unconscious thoughts is to attack those who stand up to his racism. By accusing them of being what he is... an extremely racially-biased individual.
As Wikipedia points out "according to some research, the projection of one's negative qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life". However, while Dennis may be doing something that is not out of the ordinary, I still say it's creepy and weird. And, due to this behavior involving accusing others of racism, I also think Dennis is a total scumbag who (on some level, at least) knows he's a fu*king liar. That's in addition to being a racist bigot.
Supporting Documents [1] Myste Arguments, DSD #8. (John Myste argues with Dennis about Affirmative Action. Although Dennis says MANY times that he understands Affirmative Action, it is clear he does not). [2] Myste Ad Hominem, DSD #9. (John Myste, sick of Dennis' stupidity and monopolizing of the conversation at Willis Hart's blog, departs, but Dennis continues to lie about him anyway).
