Google On The Brain

Apparently, Robin Edgar can’t get enough of Google.  When he has nothing else to write, he boasts about getting Google hits.  Or, he finds somebody else’s Google search about Unitarian Universalism – but always in a negative light – and announces it to the world.  Or, declare that, since you can’t find anything on Google to prove something about him, then it must be false.

Robin Edgar has Google on the brain.

Picketing a church only gets him the attention of a few hundred individuals, mostly in one city.  Writing angry letters, demanding attention and vindication (and yet denying, or attempting to justify, his own childish behaviour) gets him a little more.  The World Wide Web multiplies that exponentially.  So, if Google can get him more of the attention he so desperately craves, then Robin Edgar will use Google to the max.

Look at how many times in his comments he tells people “Just Google _____”, as “proof” that UUs are so bad, so corrupt, so full of “Big Fat U*U BS”.  If it’s on Google, then it must be true, right?

Except that the bulk of those Google links he loves to point people to were created by Robin Edgar himself.

This is nothing new.  Robin Edgar has rationalized the long-winded and repetitive nature of his writings as an effort to get more Google hits.  Now he believes he can actually manufacture truth by spreading more and more Google links all over the world, all pointing in the same direction – the same mean-spirited, negative direction he has been fixated on for almost two decades now.

And what about all of the Google searches, Google links and Google hits which run contrary to Robin Edgar’s version of truth?  What about all of the other search engines out there, and all of the searches, links and hits on those?

Well, we don’t expect Robin Edgar to listen or change any time soon.  Not until he turns off his computer and takes a good, hard look at himself, at how counterproductive his efforts have been, and at how many people he has hurt along the way.

Robin Edgar and UU Christians

Many of Robin Edgar’s most recent posts have been a lame attempt to “prove” that Unitarian Universalists are hostile to Christianity.  Not just some UUs to some Christians, but across the board.

The lamest have been announcements that this or that unknown individual was looking on Google (Robin Edgar’s favorite search engine, and apparently the only one he considers worth mentioning) about UUs being “unwelcoming” to Christians, or even “dissing” Christians.

Is Robin Edgar yet again trying to gain sympathy from some corner of Unitarian Universalism?  If so, he’s not doing a very good job of it.  We’ve read better appeals for more inclusion of UU Christians from other bloggers and commenters, both Christian and non-Christian.

Instead of gleefully posting such ridiculous items, why doesn’t he give some constructive advice on how some UU congregations might be more inclusive and diverse?  Why, indeed, doesn’t he give any constructive advice at all?

Because, to do so, Robin Edgar would have to put down the axe that he has been grinding so long, and actually come up with a positive vision, instead of trying to trash anybody and everybody who dares to question him, or even simply ignore him.

If Robin Edgar truly wants to defend UU Christians, he could start by living out the basic tenets of Christianity which so many UU Christians abide by.  Love thine enemies.  Turn the other cheek.  Forgive those who have wronged you.  Or, if all else fails, shake the dust from your shoes and walk way.

Robin Edgar’s Latest Target

As far as we can tell, Dan Furmansky has never done anything to Robin Edgar.  Apparently, that’s not good enough for the self-proclaimed “Emerson Avenger.”

Furmansky, current manager of the UUA’s Standing on the Side of Love Campaign, is now the latest recipient of “the Robin Edgar Treatment”, which goes something like this…

First, Robin Edgar reads something you have written online.  Sounds innocent enough, except that Robin Edgar seems unable to read anything regarding Unitarian Universalism without looking for an excuse to lash out at Unitarian Universalists.  So when Furmansky calls for supporting religious freedom for Muslims in the United States, Robin Edgar then sends a post to the Campaign’s blog, accusing UUA President Peter Morales of being anti-Muslim.

Obviously, Robin Edgar does not understand what tolerance actually means.  Morales and other UUs may disagree with the tenets of Islam, or any other religious position, yet still uphold the right of people who hold to those views to worship and live freely in a free society.  That is tolerance, and that is the philosophy behind the Standing on the Side of Love Campaign’s support for the Cordoba House project, and for President Obama’s defense of religious freedom for all Americans.

Of course, it won’t end there.  No doubt Furmansky will choose not to publish Robin Edgar’s comment, as is his right as blogsite moderator.  The likely reaction will be to accuse Furmansky of “censorship” for doing so, not to mention joining in some vast UU conspiracy against him personally.  Remember, if you are not with Robin Edgar all the way, then you must be against him, and since those against him are guilty of “injustices, abuses and hypocrisy”, then you must be, too.

We are sure that Dan Furmansky has better things to do than worry about the ravings of this man.  So we encourage him to do what he feels is best as both campaign manager and blog moderator.

Besides, as we have said before, there is no way to win with Robin Edgar.  Question him, and he attacks you.  Ignore him, and he still attacks you.  Try to help him, and sooner or later he goes after you for not supporting him enough.

So, carry on, Dan.  Do what is right.  Just be careful if you ever decide to visit Montreal.

What’s With Robin Edgar’s Obsession With Google Hits?

Once again, Robin Edgar wants us to believe that a Google hit on his “Emerson Avenger” blog, or a Google search on anything negative or critical of Unitarian Universalism, somehow counts as another noteworthy example of “injustices, abuses and hypocrisy.”

Unfortunately (for him), all that it does accomplish is reinforce his own narcissism and obsessive fixation.

More and more, Robin Edgar has resorted to Google hit reports to fill in his blog.  No more creative energy left (such as it was)?  No more taking photos and covering them with cheesy insults?

Robin Edgar has has less and less to say over the years, other than the same old rage-filled rants on the same fixations and grudges.  Now all he has left is reporting (and retorting) on other people’s Google searches, without even an attempt to discuss the issue.

It’s clear that he has spent so much time pounding away on a computer keyboard, it has become the central focus of his life.  Worse, he shows few signs of having any life outside of lashing out at UUs from the safety of cyberspace.  Even the frequency of his pickets at the Unitarian Church of Montreal have dwindled.

Of course, Robin Edgar has the opportunity to prove that he indeed has other interests besides this.  But, we doubt very much if he will even bother to do so.

Robin Edgar’s Manic Panic

It’s getting hard to keep up with Robin Edgar.  After his summer hiatus, where his sparse blog posts consisted of noting a Google hit here or there (important to him, yet we still fail to see how it matters), he seems to feel the need to pound out post after post on “The Emerson Avenger” as if to make up for lost time.  Or, let loose all his pent-up rage.

He’s accusing one UU blogger of plagiarism for using a rather well-worn phrase.  Not to mention lashing out at the “Standing on the Side of Love” campaign for allegedly refusing “to stand on the side of love for ALL victims of U*U clergy misconduct” (namely, him); because of this “refusal” he has deemed it fit, once again, to accuse the UUA  to be supporting clergy misconduct.

Robin Edgar just does not get it.  This is not about refusing to address clergy misconduct.  This is about refusing to waste time with a one man’s histrionic and self-centred need to be at the centre of attention.

We don’t expect Robin Edgar to get the hint any time soon.  We would hope, however, that UUs get the hint that nothing they do will placate this man.  They need to stop giving him a forum, and stop responding to him.  Keep an eye on him, yes.  Absolutely!  There is no telling when this individual will cross the line and decide that his abusive and over-the-top verbiage will not be enough, and he will feel the need to take “direct action” of an even more destructive nature.

A Question for Robin Edgar

Dear Robin Edgar:

We would post this as a comment on your “Emerson Avenger” blog, but you have a nasty habit of tracking down the people who dare to question you, and harassing them all across Cyberspace.  So, we will post it here, and hope it gets your attention.

You say that the purpose of your blog is to speak out about “injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism.”  But lately, a lot of your posts seem to have nothing to do with that, only serving to ridicule UUs simply because you don’t agree with them.

Your most recent post is the worst example we have yet seen of this.  How is a spammer managing to post about Nike shoes on the FUUSE blog fit the criteria of “injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism”?

Perhaps your definition of “injustices and abuses” is anything that falls short of your standards for perfection.  If so, may we ask that you take a good, hard look at your own conduct?  When a UU minister is found to be guilty of false imprisonment and rape — exposed, in fact, by members of his own congregation, then removed from ministerial fellowship, and notice of same acknowledged in a press release by the UUA — you then accuse the UUA and UUs of a non-existent “cover-up”.  Now that would fall short of perfection by anybody’s standards, and could in fact be seen as outright abusive, not to mention as unjust as any false accusation could be.

What about your obsessive fixation over the willingness of UU leaders to put their bodies and freedom on the line to speak out for the rights of immigrants in Arizona?  Not enough to label it all as “ersatz” civil disobedience, you lower yourself to tasteless sexual innuendo.

You claim to speak out against injustices, yet we see a number of examples of unjust accusations by you, Robin Edgar.  You claim to expose abuses, and to be a victim of abuse, but we see even more disturbing cases of abuse perpetrated by you.

You say that you do not hate UUs, only “*some*” of them, yet you seem to go out on a limb to find new targets for your seemingly limitless supply of vitriol. 

We would think that anybody who is serious about exposing injustices and abuses would be more diligent and more serious.  We would think anybody who does so would take the time to check their facts, to keep to relevant matters, and to refrain from personal insults.

So, why haven’t you?  Why do you fall so short of your own mission?  Why is your own behaviour riddled with even more egregious examples of injustice and abuse?

That is our question for you, Robin Edgar.

Robin Edgar’s “Pointed” Rebuttal

Robin Edgar had promised to deliver a “point-for-point rebuttal” of our recent post, “What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?”  Among the slew of recent posts on “The Emerson Avenger” (which we will address further down) we find yet another rage-filled rant in response to the allegations posted here.

So how many “points” did he “rebut”?  One.  That’s all.  Nothing else.

Consider that the main issue being addressed is whether Robin Edgar’s outlandish behaviour was “provoked” by what he claims Reverend Ray Drennan told him in a private meeting, or whether this pattern of behaviour was the very reason Drennan met with him.  Consider further how we treated the allegation which was brought to our attention — not as solid fact which completely refuted Robin Edgar’s assertions, but as an allegation which at best gives reason to consider his version of events with a grain of salt.

Does Robin Edgar address this main issue?  No, he does not.  Instead, he goes on a lengthy, histrionic rant about the minor allegation that he threw a chair.  He goes on and on and on, denying over and over again that there was ever a “chair-throwing incident,” even putting forward the fallacious argument that, since you can’t find it in any Google search, then it could never have happened.

As for the main point, or any other point in our reader’s account?  He does not address this at all.

Not that this is surprising, as Robin Edgar has been known for avoiding questions asked of him, especially when it demands that he be held as accountable for his language and behaviour as anybody else.  No, he would rather nit-pick and fixate on minor issues rather than address the all-important issue of why he must lash out, insult, berate and belittle UUs, while he himself accomplishes nothing except the making of himself into a clownish caricature.

Take how he has responded to the participation of UUs in the recent “Day of Non-Compliance” in Phoenix, Arizona.  Amongst UU bloggers there has been healthy and thoughtful debate on the impact of these protests, both for the immigration issue and for the public perception of Unitarian Universalism.  Contrast this against Robin Edgar’s juvenile and tasteless posts on “The Emerson Avenger”.  He calls any given online disagreement, even when done in a civil tone, as a “kick in the balls”.  He tries to ridicule UUs in handcuffs with snide remarks about “bondage and domination”.  Yet in none of his feeble attempts at humour is there anything constructive or even entertaining.  It is nothing more than yet another pathetic display of Robin Edgar’s tendency to fixate on things which are relevant only to Robin Edgar.

Perhaps why he has wasted so much type on the minor question of whether or not he threw a chair.  To him, it is more important that he win that argument, even if only in his own mind, than ever dare to consider how his own nearly monomaniacal and rage-filled behaviour and language has not only cost him support, but annoyed and even frightened so many around him.

Robin Edgar Doth Protest Too Much

Well, after about two weeks of silence, Robin Edgar has struck again.

July 30, with apparently nothing better to do, he lashes out at this blog, now making the baseless claim that it is being written by a minister he does not like, whom he now asserts has Multiple Personality Disorder.  Woe unto anybody who dares to guess what is wrong with him, yet he proclaims the right to do so unto others (and not to help them, but to attack and belittle them).

In addition, Robin Edgar insists that the allegations presented to us (and recounted in our post “What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?”) are nothing more than “libelous” examples of “Big Fat U*U B S”, and insists that he will “rebut” them point for point.  We have heard this before, and again Robin Edgar is engaging in yet more black-and-white thinking.  As we said earlier, these allegations have not been proven; they merely open the question of what indeed happened which has set off so many years of obsessive and rage-filled attacks by this man.  If he has demonstrable evidence of what happened, let him present it.  If the other side can do so, we welcome that, too.  But if his “point-for-point rebuttal” is to be nothing more than more hysterically angry name-calling, then we are inclined to ignore it, because that is simply not evidence.

August 1, after posting comments on other UU blogs, he lashes out at the hundreds of UUs who have chosen to go to Arizona to protest that state’s recently passed immigration law.  No constructive criticism, either, which is par for the course for him.  Just more insults, calling UU protesters “stupid”, and another tasteless attempt at humour declaring that UUs who wind up handcuffed must be “into bondage.”

At least when other UUs question whether such protests are morally appropriate, or whether they will have any effect, they do not stoop to personal insults against those involved in the protests.  We have noticed a healthy debate among UU bloggers and their readers on the issue, with the sole exception of Robin Edgar.  Then again, he does not want to debate.  He wants to attack, to waste so much of his life and energy making Unitarian Universalism look bad, and to make himself the centre of attention.

If that is not bad enough, he has to whine yet again whenever even one of his numerous comments on other bloggers’ pages does not get approved.  When will other UUs learn that trying to deal with him is a no-win situation?  Since Robin Edgar thinks every word he types is important, how dare anybody decide that any of his comments is over the top?  Not to mention the software for some blogs, which screen comment submissions with more than one or two links for administrator approval, as a way of controlling spammers, as this is a signature they have in common with him.

We do not expect Robin Edgar to grow up and finally realize that the UU blogosphere is not his personal sandbox, where he can bully everybody else into doing whatever he demands.  We would hope, however, that more UU bloggers will recognize that there is nothing to be gained by allowing him to hijack their sites for spreading even more of his venom.  Screening him (and others) is not a form of censorship, because it does not prevent him from posting whatever he wants on his own blog.  It does, however, keep conversations on track, and will make a clear statement to him that, based on his prior behaviour, he cannot be trusted to engage in civil and meaningful discussion, and that he has nobody else to blame for this but himself.