You’re a Victim? Gosh, Herc, You Disappoint Me

 

Well, Herc, I’ve been putting up with your indulgences for some time now but today you’ve outdone yourself, arguing, rather pathetically I might add, that watching what we eat is futile because we live in an Agricultural and Technological Age in which food has become the great Comfort Mamma rendering us helpless before the alter of overreatting.

Herc, I’ve got news for you. Food has always been a source of comfort and people have always loved to eat. Please don’t try to paint yourself as a helpless victim in the face of your modern food temptations. If you wish to blather up some pretentious anthropological, psycho-babble about why you’re a glutton who is resigned to being thirty pounds overweight, so be it. Just don’t come crying to me.  Go tell it to your mamma. 

Your Snarky Ombudsman, Max

 

Comments

[Tim]

I find the above message from Max quite refreshing. I check this blog nearly every day for the excellent information on radios, and I often leave comments as well. But the truth is, I loathe all the liberal rubbish that I often have to wade through. Periodically I read something here that makes me eliminate this blog from my "favorites" list. For example, the short article a few weeks ago whining about the Christian who scribbled a comment of his own on the page of a book, or who added a religious message next to a whore's phone number scrolled on a bathroom wall - that was a really pitiful jab at believers, and a poorly disguised shot at Christians in particular, of which I'm proud to say I'm one. In fact, you forgot to whine about the whore who left the phone number in the first place! I know, I know, she too was probably a victim. Whereas that obnoxious Christian - what a wretch!

I'd be happy to see a little serious debate on this blog, a little more manly argumentation, rather than the monotonous one-sided weary old leftist wholistic vegetarian sensitive male perspective concerning self, pets, and stereotypes. It just makes me sick to read such effete blather day after day. And I'm just waiting for an article on global warming - oops, I mean "climate change." Surely there's one in the making.

[Jeffrey McMahon]

Tim, that is an eye-opening comment. I am not a leftist and only admonished the graffiti artist, not his faith. But your perception of this blog's opinions as biased towards the ways you describe makes me more circumspect about how I present things here.

[Ed]

It's your blog, Jeff. Don't cave to political or religious correctness, write what you wish. If someone wants to push their own views, they are free to start their own site. No one is forcing anyone to read this forum. ("If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.") I can't stand this damn nanny state this country is turning into, where no one's feelings can be hurt. Life's tough. You man up, complainers.

[Tim]

Ed, if you didn't get the gist of my comments, I called for "debate," not pushing my views. I agree with your "nanny state" remark. But how on earth do my comments contribute to or reflect this nanny-ness? What's less nanny-like, less politically correct, than debate and argumentation? It's the touchy-feely sensitive male stuff on this blog that turns my stomach. It would be refreshing to hear something to the contrary for a change, such as Max's remarks.

[Tim]

Graffiti..."artist?" Hmmm. I thought graffiti was vandalism. It certainly is when it's on your own property.

[Shawn Patrick]

Tim & Max hit it on the head.

[Mike W]

Geez, is this "Beat up on Jeff Day", or what?

I just chalk up all the soy-burger-and-pop-psychology posts to the fact that Jeff lives in L.A. and leave it at that. No harm done.

As for being anti-Christian, I've seen him turn the other cheek here so many times that some of the church-goers I've known could learn a thing or two from him.

[Jeffrey McMahon]

I wrote a post a while back about someone who wrote in a library book. The person shouldn't have been writing in the library book. It wasn't his property. That was the point regardless of that person's faith.

[Mike W]

You know, you passed up the chance to squeeze the word 'palimpsest' into a post there, Jeff. You'll not have many of those. 'Lugubrious' & 'crapulence' are ten a penny by comparison.

[Jeffrey McMahon]

Yeah, Mike, I'm sliding. The word "palimpsest" is rich with puns and such. I'm a lugubrious chap these days.

[Tim]

Jeff -

You're actually getting at my point. I agree with you that those two Christians who scrbbled in the book and the stall shouldn't have done so, because it wasn't their property. And I understand that you're original point was to hold up hypocritical zealotry. I got all that. But I did find it interesting that both of your examples referred only to religious zealotry. Is there no other type? Are there no hypocritical agnostics around? Have you never come across a zealous liberal who, in their zeal for "tolerance," behaves like the Taliban when it comes to tolerating views contrary to their own?

You seem to be following a popular cultural notion that says graffiti is "art." But if it is art, then why is it wrong for a couple of Christians to scribble a meassage or two in a book or a stall? Is graffiti wrong only when certain types of people engage in it? I'm just curious about your reasoning Jeff, that's all. If you have me as a gadfly, you certainly have many more defenders.

[Ed]

Oh right, like there aren't enough websites where you can espouse your conservative Christian agenda. Give me a break. Go whine somewhere else. We mainly discuss radios, watches and food here, if you've been paying any attention at all. Let's get back to core principles.

[Jeffrey McMahon]

One post about graffiti doesn't exclude me from being critical of people from all world views. People who know me, understand that I'm a non-partisan equal-opportunity egg-thrower. I admire for example, South Park, which satirizes liberal Rob Reiner and his various conservative counterparts.

[Tim]

I wasn't the one who brought up religion, Ed. Take a look at the original article by Jeff, to which I didn't even respond at the time. As I said, I refer to this blog entirely for radio issues. And lo and behold, I find a few religious comments. Well, a religious story, followed by an overt invition for readers to leave comments, produced an actual religious comment. What a surprise!

It's so very interesting, though, that a person can criticize Christians without having an agenda. But as soon as a Christian responds - ooh, he's a guy with an agenda.

[Jeffrey McMahon]

I prefer to be eclectic on my blog as I won't limit myself to radio posts.

I'm against all people from scribbling in library books regardless of their religion or lack thereof. I know a lot of good Christians who would never scribble in a library book. That is my point. I'm not picking a fight here.