If you are a copyright owner and believe that your copyrighted works have been used in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, here is our DMCA Notice.

« Mining the Audio Motherlode, Volume 29 (MP3s) | Main | 101 Cassette Labels »

August 19, 2009


chingo bling

Fuck the Kennedys.


So, it was contemptible in the extreme to castigate Hitler posthumously for his breaches in ethics and character?


Godwin'd in two. That's a hiiiiiiigh level of discourse you're aiming for.


If the blog post you mention was the one on this blog, repugnant is right.

Not only did it call out Kennedy for his sins, it condemned him: "There's no redeeming him." I didn't realize it was your decision, Mr. or Ms Whoever the fuck you are.

And as the cherry on top, the last words of the post are "may God bless."

Apparently that doesn't include Teddy.


jesus x. christ, who gives a shit? the dead certainly don't. when did fmu followers go from people who would (metaphorically) piss on a headstone to pantywaists who fear to offend? is there a bobby mcferrin channel you all can post on somewheres?


It was a weird post though, 'god bless it'.

Jonathan Steinke

Oh, Jim...the comparison to which you are alluding is A) not going to be entertained and B) making you look like a fucking goldbricker.

Who gives a shit, indeed, Craig. An equally viable question to have asked the Kopechne poster, wouldn't ya imagine? "Pantywaists who fear to offend". Uh, Craig, when two people have what they might previously deem an innocent conversation, especially about the awful things a now-dead person had done WHEN THEY WERE LIVING, and THEN proceed to post it on a public forum for humankind to read, it has made the tempestuous permutation from "innocent conversation" to "Hoooo, we are going to piss people off and bag a shitload of comments from this one, dawg!!".

In that sense the Kopechne post definitely wasn't aiming for a hiiiiiigh level of discoure either there, was it, Joe?


If your criticism was based on the offending post's complete lack of content or genuine criticism I would be much more willing to hear your arguments. But since you present the case as one of simply "bad taste" to speak ill of the dead and proceed to run off on a gripe with some other blogger and some other death, neither of which I have heard of nor care about, I have to classify you as a loon.

Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger

Thanks for sending all that traffic to The Emerson Avenger blog Jonathan. It's always appreciated. :-)

For the record "less than excellent", or indeed "less than perfect", are words that considerably less than excellent and far from perfect U*U clergy use to describe themselves. I am in fact throwing back those words in *their* outrageously hypocritical two faces. . . DIM Thinking is a phrase coined by clergy misconduct expert Dee Miller to describe the Denial, Ignorance and Minimization of "less than ethical" behavior, including clergy sexual misconduct and such things. Corpse-cold Unitarians plays off of Ralph Waldo Emerson's famous reference to "the corpse-cold Unitarianism of Brattle Street and Harvard College" and refers to the remarkably insensitive and callous cold-heartedness of rather too many of the Unitarians aka U*Us I have the misfortune to know.


Two facts worth considering:

1. Children often say cruel and thoughtless things. They do so because they haven't developed a filter, common sense, tact, empathy, etc.

2. Some adults are childish. This could be due to arrested development, lack of education, or incapacity, ie.. stupidity, psychopathy, etc.

Throwing your verbal garbage out the window onto the Information Super-highway may be common, but it makes Chief Iron Eyes Cody cry.


So no one should ever say again that Michael Jackson was a child molester who bought off his victims to drop the charges. Or that Ted Kennedy should have done time for manslaughter or enabling a rape to occur at the Kennedy compound in Florida . And when OJ Simpson dies should we all lay down our heads and pray? God Bless us all, if you believe in that sort of thing.


What the hell is a Unitarian? If it's not an obscure krautrock band, I don't care.

Listener #109577

What-ever. I'm no longer interested in whatever it was you originally posted about. In fact, your cheap sniping at Bronwyn tends to make me think YOU weren't, either. Again, whatEVER.

Regarding the the Hitler reference: It should be pretty clear to anyone who can muster an objective thought in their brain that it was not intended to compare Hitler and T. Kennedy as moral equals, but, rather, to demonstrate the silliness of denouncing all postmortem criticism. There will always be exceptions. Saying that there are none, or saying that anyone who says that your guy CAN'T be one of them, is stupid at best and bullying at worst.

I don't think that Bronwyn has much of a point, because I think all religion-referencing arguments are bullshit. But I also think that anyone who is offended by her post should not let the door bang their ass on the way out.


Once people bring up some analogy to Hitler or the Nazis, you can pretty much ignore any dilettante political argument (always phrased in absolutes) that their junior high debating skills seek to employ. Hitler bad? Teddy bad? Hitler = Teddy. Red Little not Teddy? Red not bad. Ad naseum...
Please, back to the music and arts.


I'll have you know I never took debate--not even in middle school, smartypants.


Why, the way I heard it Jim, you were a master debater in middle school. Besides, everyone knows that Obama = Hitler. WAKE UP SHEEPLE! I'M TYPING IN ALL CAPS! CAN'T YOU HEAR ME???

Robin Edgar

Arvo said, "What the hell is a Unitarian? If it's not an obscure krautrock band, I don't care."

Well Arvo, if you want to stretch the meaning of "an obscure krautrock band" just a little bit, one *could* say that German Unitarians are alleged to be something of an obscure krautrock band of brothers. German anti-fascist and anti-racist groups have been alleging for decades that alleged Nazi ideologues, some of who were allegedly former SS officers and even convicted war criminals took over the Unitarian church in Germany in the late 1940s or early 1950s and used it as a front group for their neo-Nazi activities. Just Google -

Deutsche Unitarier Nazis

to learn more about this. For the record 'Unitarier' is Unitarian in German and Aryan in German is 'Arier'. Kind of convenient eh? United Aryans perhaps? It would appear that it might not be totally unfair to refer to at least some of the post WWII German Unitarians as UnitAryans. ;-)

Jonathan Steinke

Postmortem criticism for Listener 109577 and another sort of thing for Dale to believe in: LET...IT...GO.

Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger


Sorry Jonathan but I don't think you made a very favorable impression with your blog post that largely misrepresented what I was saying in my allegedly "less than excellent" blog post. I clearly said that I was withholding some criticism of Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen as a result of his death, criticism that AFAIAC he thoroughly deserved and that I had intended to post prior to his death. As should be clear from some of the comments here the simple act of dying does not suddenly make a person immune to criticism. The whole point of my blog post was that people should make an effort to mend fences with those people they have harmed *before* they die rather than neglecting such responsibilities or moral obligations. I might add that this is perhaps especially true of clergy who are supposed to be spiritual leaders and set an example for society.

So just what are Listener 109577 and Dale, or indeed myself, supposed to LET GO of Jonathan? Often when someone say LET IT GO in ALL CAPS SHOUTING its because they have lost the argument. . . Come to think of it it's similar to Godwin's rule. The first person to say LET IT GO in an argument has lost the argument.

Allah prochaine,

Robin Edgar

P.S. Thanks again for all the traffic you sent my way with this blog post. It was kind of nice having my August web stats go out with a bang! :-)


Robin, he lost the argument when I NAILED him with my Hitler comment. Booyow!

Jonathan Steinke

Lost the argument? The comments are still enabled, aren't they?

Jim, seriously...had you not yet ascertained from Robin's comment referencing Godwin's rule that your first comment applied it? Jig's up, cussin.

Robin...first off, the fact you mentioned how my blog post beefed up your web stats TWICE not only doesn't impress me, it only further amplifies your narcissism. Secondly, I don't know whether your decision not to post the criticism prior to his death was because you somehow weren't able to do so or you actually did intend all along to post it after his death. I, personally, am leaning toward the second. (Didn't you say you believe in God now? Uh, Matthew 6:14.) But I guarantee you would be clenching a closed FIST around your tongue and weeping like a little bitch if the person had been your brother or uncle or something.

It's people in fucking Western society who don't put themselves in the places of mourning relatives (regardless of socioeconomic position) of other people for whom I instantly lose respect.


I never heard of Godwin's Law, but I never said let it go. I nailed your sorry butt. Just because you use a lot of big words doesn't make you right.

Jonathan Steinke

Never implied you said let it go...I said let it go. Focus, Jim...focus.

No, you didn't nail my "sorry butt" because you applied Godwin's Law. And Godwin's Law states the first person in a Usenet or comment thread who namedrops Hitler then explains why they namedropped Hitler (everybody, meet Jim) is doing so in a last-ditch, hopelessly desperate attempt to disprove the original poster because they realize they no longer have a theoretical leg on which to stand.

Other way 'round, big guy.


You misread Godwin's Law. Furthermore, your penchant for obfuscating the dearth of cogent rhetoric in your missives via sesquipedalian displays such as "tempestuous permutation" is risible. I suggest that you look up "permutation," because your use of the word was incorrect and nonsensical.

But suit yourself. Let's substitute Saddam Hussein for Hitler. Explain to the families of the people he had murdered why castigating him for breaches in ethics and character posthumously is contemptible in the extreme.

Consider yourself nailed again. You're entitled to your opinion, but your condescending tone really is irritating.

Jonathan Steinke

Well, look at that...Godwin'd in THREE!

Speaking of, care to explain HOW I misread Godwin's Law? Me and my mouth. Looks like...right about...HERE! Eighth paragraph: Shit, if not going into further detail than that one sentence explaining why I misread it isn't proof enough you've thrown in the towel, I don't what is!

I'll leave the obvious "apples and oranges" ethical deathmatch argument concerning Hussein vs. Edward Kennedy to those reading this blog and listening to this station who can add single numbers together.

The comments to this entry are closed.