Ted Dead?
Party animal, Hero of Chappaquiddick, dog giver to the O – no matter what anyone says the man sank to the bottom at least once – is reported by the Chicago Tribune to have leapt this mortal coil.
And, with him, one hopes, the shining beacon of stockswindler, appeasement boy and serial diddler Joe Kennedy and his Son the President who inherited the least obnoxious of Dad’s traits.
Time for the Kennedys to lie dormant for a generation or two.
(And sorry for all you folks who object to the celebration of the death of a bloated poltroon who killed a girl…It could not have happened too soon.)
Update: and here are the finger waggers now, courtesy of Dr. Dawg. I can’t see what there is here to be “compassionate” about. The man killed a girl and went on with his life. For me whatever, limited, merit Kennedy had died in the air pocket Mary-Jo spent her last hour in. Many things are forgivable, cowardice leading to death is not.)
August 26th, 2009 at 5:39 am
It’s good that he’s dead (if he’s dead). It’s a damned shame it didn’t involve him going through a wood chipper feet first. Slowly.
August 26th, 2009 at 6:15 am
Jay, with this vitriol you reveal far more about yourself than you do about the man you revile. This man certainly came short of your expectations and had some awful failures of courage in his life. How about you?
On the other side of the ledger, his contributions are well documented, as are the tragedies he endured, which include his final sufferings with a cruel disease. I’m ashamed for you Jay. You’ve embarrassed yourself.
August 26th, 2009 at 9:45 am
“It could not have happened too soon.”
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I said.
August 26th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Sean:
Thank you for a classic illustration of “compassionate conservatism.” I shall be using it in the future, link and all.
As for you, Jay, sometimes I think you need a good rest. Like about now.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:30 am
And as for “bloated poltroon who killed a girl,” I take it you would have had no objection if it had been an IDF soldier?
August 26th, 2009 at 10:37 am
‘shuffled off this mortal coil’...though a cliche works far more effectively….gives a more classical caste to his villainy….and long awaited devoutly wished exit from the stage….
August 26th, 2009 at 10:43 am
This man lived far, far too long. Just as assuredly as the Liberal Party has assumed for itself the Natural Governing Party of Canada status, the Kennedy clan considers itself the Natural Governing Dynasty in what is supposed to be a republic. What’s a little murder, criminal negligence, womanizing, using family connections to achieve perks that had not been earned or anointing your niece to the Senate to ensure the Dynasty’s preservation? It’s all permitted if your family’s heritage as rulers is pre-ordained.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:26 am
“I’m ashamed for you Jay. You’ve embarrassed yourself.”
Amen!
August 26th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Johnny, last I checked, Jay’s never killed a woman. Kennedy’s contributions are dubious: growing big government, handing out other people’s hard earned money to lowlifes (while hogging his own), sticking up for latin american communists.
OJ played some nice football too and made some funny movies.
We all have to die of something. So what? the disease you get at the end doesn’t bestow any special merit on you by osmosis. Neither does the tragic death of your relatives. Mary Jo suffered for an hour in an air pocket at least according to the coroner. A death that could have been prevented.
On the plus side, I hear they’re making Diet Kool Aid now. Enjoy!
August 26th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Sean: you have an astoundingly large spirit. It just shines on, man. Jay, this is not about Kennedy, here. This is about you. And Sean. And I, I guess (to this point in the comments section…). I say you are revealing some kind of shrunken capacity for compassion, and at a particularly interesting time.
This stuff about Mary Jo is a ruse. This is nothing more than envy, isn’t it? Kennedy is getting too much attention, and you too little?
August 26th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Apparently, for the left, pretty much anything is forgivable so long as you are politically sound.
Dawg, I suppose you might make the argument that Mary-Jo put herself in harm’s way by climbing into the car with this oaf which is what you are implying when you try to tie her to the idiot under the bulldozer.
August 26th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Jay and Kathy et al: Come on! Again, this is not about Kennedy, really. This is about how freaking petty we can become if we allow that? Kathy, neither your life nor mine would do well under the kind of scrutiny that is part of a Kennedy’s life. I have not written that I feel sorry for the man. He lived a very full life, both on the regrettable side and on the laudable side of the ledger.
Kathy, I think you, in particular, are literally trading in attitude here in an effort to boost attention to your other blog offerings. I’ve written before (and mean it…) that I think you are smart enough and gifted enough to make every comment you need to make, attack every issue you need to attack, without the nasty and dirty shank you bring.
When you wish the kind of things on another human being that you claim to wish on Kennedy, both before and on the occasion of his death, I’m convinced you’re doing your own cause in life nothing but harm.
August 26th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
“handing out other people’s hard earned money to lowlifes”
Speaking of which, has Shaidle ever paid back any of the grants and welfare she’s gotten in her lifetime?
August 26th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Here are my last words on this topic: some folks here purport to care deeply about speaking freely, so this must be seen as a healthy exercise. I don’t trust the stated motivations of some writers here. I draw this conclusion-there must be something about Ted Kennedy’s life that leaves some com mentors here feeling diminished. That’s odd, actually, because Ted Kennedy was many many different manifestations of humanity at many different times.
He was a buffoon, a loving brother, a loyal partisan, criminally negligent, a loving father, a failure as a husband (at least once…), a drunk, a recovering drunk, a fearless survivor, a fearful survivor, and a tireless doer of the slow work of writing and lobbying for legislation. Ironically, while he was doing that work he received little attention, but in his death that’s the work that is most highly praised.
He WILL be remembered, and he WILL be missed. By hundreds of thousands. By millions, even. And that seems to stick in some craws. None of this ought to be placed in the perspective of left/right, unless the ones placing it there are wearing very tightly fitting partisan blinders.
He was a man. That’s all. We ought to wish him what we wish ourselves. It’s striking that one or two commentors here claim Christianity as their religious orientation. I have no idea how they square that circle.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Jay, you should be aware, the so righteous left, models for all of humanity, would like us all to know of their compassion. Of the multitude of graceful, example setting, heartfelt condolences that always come like a flood from the left upon the death of a politician, lets revisit some posted upon the death of Ronald Reagan:
“Glad he’s dead. He should be lucky he expired under his own power..”
“Ronald Reagan was a conman. Reagan was a coward. Reagan was a killer.”
“I have zero respect for the man, and could care less, other than for the sake of history that he is gone….Finally gone…”
“I hate reagan”
“Ronald Reagan had the intellgence of a slug and more evil than hitler & stalin & pinochet put together.”
Our moral masters and on hand clappers pave the way.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I am aware Sounder and I am just waiting for the death of Lady Thatcher to see how our moral masters treat the death of another person who never directly killed anyone.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Give it up, Jay. You are simply wrong.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Yeah Johnny, I have thousands of readers a day, but I need “attention”. I blog under my own name, don’t hide behind a stupid fake one, and don’t stick up for idiots. Your understanding of what motivates people is extremely childlike. You accuse Jay and I of envy or needing attention. Those are the charges of a teenaged girl, not a so-called adult.
Your moral exhibitionism is a bore. You remind me of a witless beauty pageant contestant who hopes that hoping for world peace will make up for her obvious intellectual shortcomings and shields her from too much cruel scrutinty.
As for St Pancake, she got what she deserved, but we can’t go five minutes without a lefty like dawg dragging the witless “Palestinians” and their useful idiots in for moral equivalence. Because a drunk driving mishap turned vehicular manslaughter in AMerica in 1969 is EXACTLY the same as throwing yourself in front of a bulldozer in the Middle East. That’s how they teach you to think at universities.
Oh and Dawg, I’ve got a new “mass grave” for you to check out. I know you’ll get right on your investigation
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/24/the-sacrifices-they-made
August 26th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
I’m liable simply to say nothing, as I did in the case of Jesse Helms. Gloating and hoping for a lingering, painful death is a right-wing malaise, not a progressive one.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Kathy: I must respond. I don’t believe, for one second, that you’re satisfied with your “thousands” of readers a day. Why mention them? Any blogger, successful or no, understands the craving for more “hits”. You’ve established a reputation, popular with a tiny minority within the larger demographic, and that reputation is that you’re crass, even racist, foul-mouthed and a braggart who fancies herself taking on the generically less courageous. So…I’m saying that everything you write, and everywhere you write it is in the service of perpetuating that reputation and encouraging more readers. You most certainly are not above asking, regularly, for more money from your readers.
I continue to think you’re smart, but you’re tremendously limited.
The folks you reach are attracted to your real and faux mean spirit. That’s nothing to be proud of. I notice you decide not to address the issue of your religious beliefs. I am certain you have claimed to be a Christian. Can you square that claim with your habitual name-calling and mud-slinging? Can you, in good faith, claim that Christ would support your expressions of contempt here, toward Ted Kennedy and others?
You usually respond by pointing out the failures and flaws of your “targets” Kathy. I’m asking you to account for yourself and your own behaviour. I’m, frankly, not that interested in what you think about Kennedy.
August 26th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Dawg seems to have conveniently forgotten that his hero,Tommy Douglas the “Greatest Canadian Of All Time” advocated the removal of lesser humans through Eugenics yet he lectures others about the morals of not honouring a killer of an innocent woman.
Hypocrite.
August 26th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Gloating and hoping for a lingering, painful death is a right-wing malaise, not a progressive one.
Dr. Dawg, don’t be absurd. Five minutes on Google will prove you dead wrong.
August 26th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
neo-cons are criminals
August 26th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Peter:
Do better. Nothing in there about a lingering, painful death. No wood-chippers, nada.
Kathy:
So there are more like you? Quelle surprise. If you allowed comments, no doubt we’d be treated to quite the mouth-breather parade, if Kate’s place is any indication.
Good for you. Seriously. It would appear to be your only achievement in life, and I salute you for it.
August 26th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
How gives a shit about a dead political hack/ spawn of prohibition-era bootleggers from a foreign country?
August 26th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
It’s times like these when we are reminded that “Don’t speak ill of the dead” is a caution, not a prohibition. Because when you do speak ill of the dead – at least the recently dead – you look like a creep. Then again, for some of the above, that’s an everyday costume.
Which isn’t to say that I didn’t mutter a grateful “buh-bye” when Doug Collins crapped out. And that I won’t mutter somoething similar when some of creeps above step in front of a bus.
In the meantime, who cares what they think about Ted Kennedy? Or how many people drop by their site to watch them bite the heads off rats?
August 26th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
He did have nice dogs.
All else couldn’t care one way or another. A dead politician? Lots where they come from.
Derek
August 26th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
> Thank you for a classic illustration of
> “compassionate conservatism.” I shall be
> using it in the future, link and all.
Feel free. The last time an eco-nut linked to me and chastised me for my environmental views, the link resulted in $400 of print sales that I promptly put into the tank of my oil burning 1980 Chevy pickup truck. Gotta love irony. :-)
August 26th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
> Sean: you have an astoundingly large
> spirit. It just shines on, man.
I haven’t killed anyone yet, so that’s something. I suppose you’d like me better if I did, if your selective display of outrage is anything to go by.
p.s. Plenty of room in that wood chipper for Omar Khadr. ;-)
August 26th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
For once, I have to (sort of) agree with TW.
The dead are owed no more respect than they managed to earn while alive.
TK left a young girl to drown to death in his car. So excuse me if I don’t mourn his passing.
August 26th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Kathy’s entirely right, Dawg. Death doesn’t grant one a special dispensation from having one’s actions attached to one’s name. Death doesn’t elevate one in the slightest.
I wonder, Dawg: if Kopechne was your little sister (if you have one), or your wife or daughter, and “Kennedy” was just the name of some asshole you’ve never met whose identity was only revealed to you through court documents and proceedings, would you would bother to defend Kennedy against those who note his actions, as they always have, and don’t forget them?
Kopechne was underwater in Kennedy’s car as he swam back to shore; he walked past a house 150 yards away—the first house he passed—that had its lights on, and then to his hotel room where he undressed and went to bed. In his words, “I almost tossed and turned and walked around that room…I had not given up hope all night long that, by some miracle, Mary Jo would have escaped from the car.”
Feel free to swear here.
At 3 am Kennedy complained to the hotel manager that someone was making noise. At 8 am he met with his cousin, and together they took the ferry back to Chappaquiddick island, where Kennedy made a series of phone calls asking for advice. He didn’t phone the authorities—not police, not fire and rescue.
Later Mary Joe Kopechne’s body was found by two fishermen. She had pressed herself, in the icy water, in pitch-blackness, into an air bubble. Police ttraced the license plate to Kennedy.
Do you find his actions at all defendable? Put differently, do you have any opinion about his moral cowardice that day, or his abnegation of even the lowest level of common grace and common humanity, or are Kathy and Jay the real issue, now that the topic is Ted Kennedy?
August 26th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Bocanut, please back up your absurd claim with verifiable references. I’m betting you’re full of shit.
August 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
I can pray for his soul as I would for any individual that dies, and I can understand the sadness or his family /friends, but that doesn’t mean that I accept anything that he did. One of the nice things about not being a liberal is I don’t have to lie and pretend that people are different that they actually are – Ted Kennedy had no morals unless there was something in it for him. He left a woman to die (and it was not a youthful mistake – he was grown man) and he has NEVER expressed remorse or a willingness to be judged by his fellow Americans – instead he used his position of privileged to evade any consequences. He professes to be a devout Catholic and at every turn he supports abortion. He cheated his way through university until he was caught but again paid no consequences because of his family connections. I don’t begrudge him his views on fighting poverty (though 47 years later it seems clear they don’t work and have cost a lot of money), and even at the end he attempted to change the very law he had already once before insisted on changing in order to protect his seat for his party. Yes, a fine and upstanding person to hold out as an example of what politicians should aspire to. I have pity on him and I hope he took full advantage of his Catholic faith to ask forgiveness and mercy – I suspect he will need it.
August 26th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
smelter rat:
His thesis entitled The Problems of the Subnormal Family was on eugenics, a way to “solve the problems of the Subnormal Family” by sterilizing mentally and physically disabled Canadians, and sending them to camps.”
Tommy Douglas
The article goes on to note that he “rejected” (although “never followed” may be more accurate) the theory after a trip to Germany in 1938, and that his government never enacted legislation to put eugenics into practice.
Next time, spare us the fake outrage, mmkay?
August 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
“Ted Kennedy had no morals unless there was something in it for him.” – Maureen.
It’s undeniable that his concern for his own reputation grossly outweighed his concern for the young woman who was trapped underwater in his car because of his own actions. He fled the scene, and didn’t call for help; he went to his hotel room and went to bed. And the next morning he spoke with advisers to alertly ponder, at great length, what best actions he should take to best secure his own comforts.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Well SEAN, you are really a very maverickish and outrageous guy. Even financially successful. You likely read at Kathy’s blog. Perhaps you could take out an ad there. She’s certainly looking for the revenue.
August 26th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
what a pathetic yet silly attention seeking individual this dawgdoc is… has anyone ever noticed he is incapable of proferring ‘policy’ ....that his only prescription is to give all who seek all they wish…
it’s an embarrassing act of course but remember during his ‘career” he only had to gull the proles under his control…and they of course being proles …and the dogdawc being a real clever fellow nobody called him on his bullshit…
here it’s a titch different…ever notice how the attention seeking dogdoc is incapable of a longitudinal discussion….he flits and faddle fucks from point to point desperately seeking and yet avoiding another commitment to nailing down the meaning of life…
but have a nice day anyway you parasitical loser..
August 26th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
EBD: If I may interject (I know you’ve addressed your comment to Dawg…); this thread of comments began with Jay’s cruel attack on a recently deceased man, Ted Kennedy. Jay’s remarks were followed by even more disgusting comments by Sean. Where and how did this become a debate about Kennedy’s relative guilt for Mary Jo Kopechne’s death? I personally think your assessment of Kennedy’s behaviour is absolutely correct. He was criminally negligent, and he escaped the full consequences of his actions in that horrible matter.
But to dismiss the entire balance of his life, the sum total of all his relationships with family members, his children, his relationship with his work, his public service…that seems remarkably harsh. Even irrational. Your argument, if I understand it, implies that we all ought to be judged by our worst moments in this life, rather than on the balance between our better and worst actions. Is that what you really believe?
August 26th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
I suspect, Johnny, that I would have rather more sympathy/empathy for Kennedy had he apologized for killing the poor girl. He never did.
August 26th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Your argument, if I understand it, implies that we all ought to be judged by our worst moments in this life, rather than on the balance between our better and worst actions.
What leads you to believe that others are not judging Teddy “on the balance of his best and worst actions,” Johnny? It may just be that others judge his “public service” less favourably than you do, or view his demonstrated willingness to let Mary Jo Kopechne die in an (ultimately futile) attempt to protect his own reputation as an overwhelming human failing (which evidently you do not).
August 27th, 2009 at 3:38 am
EBD:
There is nothing in my remarks that “defends” Edward Kennedy. Nor, for that matter, will you find his name mentioned at my place, except in the same connection as in my comments here.
He is merely the locus, in this place and elsewhere, for an orgy of hatred and gloating—notably from Jay and Sean and Cathy and Doug Collins’ drooling cabin-boy, but they are far from alone.
Plain decency is still a value in Canada, despite the assaults on the very notion from the Right. That’s what’s in contention here, not Kennedy’s discreditable conduct in Chappaquiddick. And that’s all that my comments addressed.
I must say I find it oddly amusing to see how bolshy you folks get about wealth, power and privilege when someone in that caste has had the temerity to espouse liberal opinions. Maybe a little even-handedness—say, a denunciation of Rush Limbaugh’s pill-fueled sex-tourism when he passes on—would convince me of the critics’ bona fides here. We’ll see when the time comes, but I’m not optimistic.
August 27th, 2009 at 5:38 am
Fair enough DCARDO, but even if I accept that others judge his failure at Chappaquiddick as “overwhelming”, I think I’ll pass on endorsing a wood chipper execution as justice.
August 27th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Your argument, if I understand it, implies that we all ought to be judged by our worst moments in this life, rather than on the balance between our better and worst actions.
When a man lives to the ripe old age of 77 and not once expresses any remorse for committing negligent homicide, I would say that “worst moment” has a bit longer shelf life than a “moment”. Try every moment of his lifetime following that event. When he descends into hell I hope he lands on the business end of the devil’s pitchfork. What a succulent and greasy weenie that would be. I’m sure the devil will belch and maybe even puke.
August 27th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
...even if I accept that others judge his failure at Chappaquiddick as “overwhelming”, I think I’ll pass on endorsing a wood chipper execution as justice
Yes, I agree. I shed no tears over Teddy, but I wouldn’t have wished brain cancer (much less a trip through a wood chipper) on the bloviating old hypocrite.
August 27th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
But to dismiss the entire balance of his life, the sum total of all his relationships with family members, his children, his relationship with his work, his public service…that seems remarkably harsh. Even irrational. Your argument, if I understand it, implies that we all ought to be judged by our worst moments in this life, rather than on the balance between our better and worst actions. Is that what you really believe?
Edward Kennedy would not have had the same quality of relationships with his family members, his children, his public had he been described and dealt with as the reckless, homicidal drunken driver that he was in 1969. Surely you realize that! Yet he was delivered from any real consequences by virtue of his Camelot ‘Kennedy’ name. I would venture to guess that, none on this blog, however deserved on the balance of their life’s work, would, in the same situation, have been given an equivalent pass.
I would have far more respect for an Edward Kennedy who frankly admitted his crime and did his time (however minimal it might have been at the time) than I have for the man that worked the blue blood system to weasel his way out of his legal problems.
I shed no tears for Edward Kennedy. His sister Eunice, who died but a few weeks ago, is far more deserving of tears.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:52 am
Jan,
“I would have far more respect for an Edward Kennedy who frankly admitted his crime and did his time (however minimal it might have been at the time)”
Kennedy pleaded guilty to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury and was given a suspended sentence. That sounds like he admitted his crime to me. There was an inquest, a grand jury and a fatal accidentt hearing, all of which found that Kennedy had acted negligently, none of which produced enough evidence to bring further criminal charges.
Homicide, incidentally, requires an intent to cause harm. I’m not familiar with the Massachusetts penal code, but in Canada, the most severe charge Kennedy could have faced was criminal negligence causing death. And that would be unlikely.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:14 am
There are no Virgins in the political realm Jay:
“Nixon enlisted secret service to spy on Ted Kennedy by Olivier Knox
Print Ted Kennedy, who died Tuesday, so enraged Richard Nixon that the disgraced president pushed in 1971 for snooping on the senator for proof he cheated on his wife, according to once-secret recordings.
And Nixon, who secretly taped some 3,700 hours of his conversations between February 1971 and July 1973, does not hide his disappointment and frustration when an aide reports back that the Massachusetts senator is “very clean.”
“The thing to do is to watch him,” he says in a September 8, 1971 recording, one of several conversations in which Nixon, apparently fearful for his 1972 reelection prospects, lashes out at Kennedy.
Nixon also says he will give the senator, who lost two older brothers to assassins’ bullets, US Secret Service protection during the campaign to avoid any blame in case someone targets Kennedy—then orders aides to use those official bodyguards as spies.
“Do you have anybody in the Secret Service that you can get to? Do you have anybody that we can rely on?” the president asks aide John Ehrlichman, who replies: “Yeah. Yeah. We’ve got several.”
“Plant one. Plant two guys on him. This could be very useful,” says Nixon, who underlines that the security arrangement will end when the campaign does and then “If he gets shot, it’s too damn bad.”
Kennedy was not a candidate in the 1972 election and therefore not eligible for automatic secret service protection, but Nixon worries of the possible political fallout if the senator shares his brothers’ fate.
“You understand what the problem is. If the son of a bitch gets shot they’ll say we didn’t furnish it. So you just buy his insurance,” says the president.
The recordings and some transcripts are available online, on a site curated by Luke Nichter, an assistant professor of history at Texas A&M University and a leading authority on the Nixon tapes.
Nixon, who lost the White House in 1960 to Kennedy’s brother John F. Kennedy, died in April 1994, 20 years after the Watergate scandal forced him to resign in disgrace.
Nixon expresses confidence in several conversations that there will be future lapses by Kennedy, who likely destroyed his own White House prospects when he fled the scene of a 1969 car accident in Chappaquiddick, Massachusetts, that claimed the life of his female companion Mary Jo Kopechne.
“You watch: I predict something more is going to happen,” the president says in an April 9, 1971 recording.
In that conversation Nixon and top aides also assail the attire of Kennedy’s then-wife Joan at a White House function, and one says the senator dissuaded her from wearing hot pants.
“It’s crude. What the hell’s the matter with them? What’s she trying to prove?” says Nixon, whose chief of staff H.R. Haldeman calls the clothing “desecration of the White House to most Americans.”
The president shows fleeting ethical worries in a May 28, 1971 recording, saying: “I don’t know, maybe it’s the wrong thing to do, but I have a feeling that if you’re going to start, better start now.”
Any doubts are gone by September 8, however, when Nixon tells aides “I could only hope that we are, frankly, doing a little persecuting” of top Democrats, including by combing their tax records for improprieties.
Nixon asks Ehrlichman whether surveillance of Kennedy has yielded anything, but the aide replies: “No, no, He’s very clean. Very clean.”
Ehrlichman, describing a recent trip by the senator to Hawaii, says Kennedy “was staying in some guy’s villa and we had a guy on him. He was just as nice as he could be the whole time.”
“The thing to do is to watch him,” Nixon replies.”
From France 24.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:58 am
> I’m not familiar with the Massachusetts penal
> code, but in Canada, the most severe charge
> Kennedy could have faced was criminal negligence
> causing death. And that would be unlikely.
Of course, Canada is a country where you can participate in the abduction, drugging, rape, and murder of several children (including your own sister) and only serve 12 years in prison for it. We may have a “legal” system, but we sure as hell don’t have a “justice” system.
How much do they charge for contempt? Because I’ve got a whackload of it.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:30 am
I will wait to see the kind and respectful words that Dr. Dawg and Johnny have reserved for the eventual passing of Carl Rove and Bush. On that day, I will expect a thoughtful and caring eulogy.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:59 am
What you’ll get from me is nothing at all. Which is, I think, a more appropriate way to respond.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I think you will be in the minority then, Dr. Dawg. I think that kind and wonderful celebrations of the life of Bush will bring out the rabid sentiments of those who hated his policies and his choices throughout his life, much like Kennedy’s are doing to those who had no respect whatsoever for the man himself.
August 28th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Cold Canadian and Jan (and Dawg): it is my sincere hope that Bush and Rove and all of us live long lives so that we have time to think things over. I also hope that by the time we march to the Off Mortal Coil launch pad, the internet will have disappeared, magically. It’s just making us less human by the nano-second.
If I understand Dawg’s cryptic remark, he is suggesting that folks have the option of saying nothing, rather than farting out nonsense about wood-chipper executions. I agree with that. Again, I’ll try and make another point, via this question: how did this (Kennedy’s death and the discussion that is flowing on this blogsite…) get to be partisan in nature?
Is wishing that Kennedy be fed (slowly, yet…) into a wood-chipper representative of your average progressive conservative in Canada? I’m certain it’s not. If I voted for the NDP sometime in the seventies, does this mean I am incapable of fathoming the terrible failure of courage and nobility Ted Kennedy suffered on that dark night in July of 1969?
No, it doesn’t. And it’s dumb to suggest otherwise.
I am writing about context here. Here is an example. Kennedy was drunk on that July night, in 1969. He was attending a party that was, in part, a thank you to staffers who had worked on his brother’s campaign. That Kennedy had a need to drink and/or fuck the horrible grief and fear from his mind is something I can understand and accommodate. Now, judge me harshly.
Jan, I think there is some irony here, if I understand the word (and I may not understand the word properly…). It has been my experience that so-called conservatives and neo-cons feel so-called liberals or leftists are poorly oriented to so-called reality. We are “moonbats”.
Well, reality in Ted Kennedy’s life, and death, is that he was judged by the American people for his terrible failure at Chappaquiddick, and they delivered their consequence. He was denied the presidency. Now, Jan, it’s not particularly realistic to continually complain you and I would be treated differently. We are not Kennedys. That is reality.
Reality is that Ted Kennedy accepted his place, eventually, and it’s necessary, today, to extend the hours for visiting his casket, because thousands upon thousands of Americans, of every age, colour and creed, are needing to get close to the man, the legend, the era. This really offends some of you, but history will, without question, finally judge that Edward Moore Kennedy was a great man.
August 28th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
so like who IS this drearily predictable doctor dawg anyway…?....must be a veterinarian doc i reckon cause he knows EVERYTHING about horse’s asses….anyone know ?....am i correct ?
August 28th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
...and weasels..he knows and is comfortable with weasels…and ferrety types…i reckon the doctor HAS to be a veterinarian..or a stable boy apprentice to the vet cause he SURE knows how to shovel the horseshit..
August 28th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Actually, John, Dr. Dawg is a late student of anthropology and very much the sort of person going for a beer with would be fun.
He is wrong headed, not, so far as I can see, evil.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
“...and very much the sort of person going for a beer with would be fun.”
Just not at the Legion.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Oh, I see…it’s about good and evil! Let me guess on which side of the aisle evil sits. Partisan perspectives about good and evil. All right here at Jay Currie’s. The only Kennedy wake that has been actually longer than Kennedy’s actual wake.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Johnny – I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about, but that’s okay, since I suspect you’re not, either. As far as partisanship, let’s let it rest with the observation that Saint Teddy observed within a four year span that appointment of a Senator was both a grave affront to democracy, which he would fight to the death to defeat, and a necessary adjunct to democracy – which upon his death was essential; the only observable difference was whether the appointee (and appointer) were Democrats or Republicans.
August 29th, 2009 at 6:53 am
dcardno: No let’s let it “rest” this way: if you have trouble understanding me it’s because your head is well up your own ass, alright. I’ll say it a little louder, in faint hopes your sphincter is not so tight as to be sound proof;
This is not about Kennedy. It’s about the miserable creepy little people, like yourself, who feel so diminished in life that a bright light hurts your eyes. “Bloviating old hypocrite…” Typical language of the self-important black clad Judge. I’m watching the Senator’s funeral at the moment, and you are annoying me, so fuck off. How’s that? Restful?
August 29th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Actually I’ve been known to hang out at the local Legion Hall. I like the way the old-timers call each other “Comrade.” :)
August 29th, 2009 at 7:49 am
agreed Jay….get him in an environment where he had to answer questions immediately and directly…a situation where there were no time outs or delays in the to and fro of debate…i think that would be informative…and possibly ultimately transformative for the vet’s weltschmerz…all this IF he could handle unconstrained argument without bursting into tears or climbing up on his stilts…
which i doubt he’s capable of…he has too much emotional capital invested in his absurd sinister psychomania….sometimes i believe his mind has been taken over by some black American congresswoman….is it possible ?
August 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Johnny – I call ‘em as I see ‘em: Teddy was a blowhard, an enduring hypocrite, a coward who let a young woman die in an attempt to save his political career, and generally a failure as a human being whose only success came from being born into the Kennedy family.
August 29th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
It’s not just the “old timers”, Dr.D., it’s the formal form of address to fellow RCL members, especially at official functions.
So, you’re a member? Interesting…
http://www.westvan60.com/meminfo/declloyalty.html
August 29th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
dcardno: well, bottom line, pal, is that no gives a shit how you call ‘em, or how you see ‘em, because you are (relatively speaking) nobody and you’re talking to nobody. You dig? Hundreds of thousands, millions of humans (you’ve heard of the species in your vast experience?) disagree with your assessment of Ted Kennedy. But, of course, you, being a mavericky sort of really individual thinker, are right and they are wrong. Yeah? Ponce!
August 30th, 2009 at 6:21 am
No, no, dcardno, I’ve been a guest. Last time I was there they were installing a new Commander.
Teddy was a blowhard, an enduring hypocrite, a coward who let a young woman die in an attempt to save his political career, and generally a failure as a human being whose only success came from being born into the Kennedy family.
Fuck, you’re not delivering my eulogy, Bub.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:36 am
No, Johnny, just like no one gives a shit about whether you are annoyed during the hagiography (except me, and I like it). There is a long line of shallow thinkers for you to swoon over, Johnny – have fun.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:58 am
dcardno: Hagiography? Is that something that is done with crayons? Speak English, for fuck sake, when you are arguing with a shallow thinker. Such bullshit. You know, I understand that tits like you lurk about, waiting for any cyber opportunity to upset your betters (i.e. profoundly sensitive right thinkers like myself who represent uncountable billions of other right thinkers…)but you shall not have the last word here, at Curries joint. On the blood of the fallen standard bearer of the Kennedy clan (and regardless of the cause of his falling down…) I swear you will not have the last word on this matter. Nothing short of Currie censoring me or deleting my comments will stop this diatribe. I fart in your general direction, dcardno, you are not worthy even to speak the name of the late (for his own funeral…) great Senator of the state of Massivetwoshits.
August 30th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Game over.
August 30th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Dawg a Kennedy?...well that explains a lot…and then the Dawg grrrowls…
“Fuck, you’re not delivering my eulogy, Bub.”
Fuck, I hope not Dawg, we need you around as long as possible but when you finally decide to pack it in there’ll be a place for your bones right beside the dinosaurs…salut! my friend.
August 30th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Well, Dawg – if you have something to recommend you, I’d be happy to deliver your eulogy; it was Teddy’s misfortune that he didn’t. Of course, that doesn’t imply that I’m in any hurry ;) to deliver your eulogy – let’s hope it’s a long way off…
August 30th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
“Nothing short of Currie censoring me or deleting my comments will stop this diatribe.”
Not a chance Johnny, as you dig deeper I can only stand in awe and wonder.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Not a chance Johnny, as you dig deeper I can only stand in awe and wonder.
As do I, Jay.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:22 am
Can anybody hear me from down here?! Jay, toss me a shovel, this one is getting dull. Dcardno, I know I have exposed myself in all of this, so I was wondering, seeing as I am all exposed and everything, if you would mind, terribly, BLOWING me? Long live the Kennedy family!
September 1st, 2009 at 3:53 am
Johnny, the shovel ain’t the only dull thing down in that hole…”I am all exposed”...for God’s sake man, pull-up your short pants, no one wants to see that.
September 1st, 2009 at 5:48 am
mahmood; welcome to this circus. Listen, I am honour-bound to continue digging this lonely hole, until one of two things happens:
1)All those who have besmirched the late great Senator Kennedy recant, or;
B)I get the last word here
September 1st, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Digging…digging…looking for new comments…thinking I may have gotten the last word….
September 1st, 2009 at 4:25 pm
John, give it up, I’m sending down the ladder(the 50 ft. one), now come on in, your dinner is getting cold.
September 1st, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Fuck! (puts down shovel, eyeballs ladder…)
September 1st, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Bye Johnny! Come back tomorrow when we’ll have the Lemire decision to kick around.
September 1st, 2009 at 8:32 pm
OK, fine! But for all those whose cares are our concern, the work goes on, the meat loaf never tasted better, and the dream shall never die!
September 1st, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Is there bacon on that meatloaf…