Graham Goes Into Terminal Phase

[_Buffalo]

I like this place sometimes, and for this reason, I can freely respond to your post by saying that Graham was not banned for telling any truths, an ability he has yet to cultivate. Graham was banned for being a perfect ass, as he always is.

The thread was closed as a "trashing and bashing" thread Where there's Kevin, there's chaos.

"Perfect ass"? Are you trying to tell us something about feelings you have toward Kevin?

In any case, we all know "trashing and bashing" is MAD-speak for "put forth an argument we weren't prepared to even attempt to refute." There was no actual bashing or trashing.

Try not to think too much about Kevin's perfect ass. ;)

[_Buffalo]

Exactly, which is why you entire posting history is a long, trying miasma of anger, ad hominem venom, bitter animosity to those who disagree with you, and the most relentless narcissism and self importance I've yet seen in the ex-Mormon world.

But there are only a handful of people who actually say these things, and even fewer who actually believe them. These are usually the folks who despise me because at some point in time, I made them look foolish. On the other hand, I call numerous intellectuals "friends" who hail from both the LDS and critical sides of the fence. You caannot say the same. In fact your posting style is so abhorrent that you find it hard to stay welcomed on your home-team board. The only time they seem to tolerate you is when you're launching into personal attacks to protect your precious veteran apologists from the likes of me. So please, stop projecting by pretending I share your credibility status in the apologetic world. Anyone who calls me "angry" does so because they need to. It makes them feel better about abandoning a debate they can't win. Anyone trying to say Taylor didn't lie has to be nuts. There is no defense there. And those who know me know I'm anything but angry.

You're just one of those poorly educated guys who thinks he can compensate for this deficiency or impress certain folks by regurgitating mantra with a thesaurus in one hand and a FAIR Journal (or Mises subscription) in the other. But I can't think of anyone, apologist or critic, who thinks you're anything more than a joke. So keep attacking me, it only makes me look better.

Even DCP thinks Droopy is a joke. He said as much in his recent Mormon Stories interview.

[Guest]

Exactly, which is why you entire posting history is a long, trying miasma of anger, ad hominem venom, bitter animosity to those who disagree with you, and the most relentless narcissism and self importance I've yet seen in the ex-Mormon world.

But there are only a handful of people who actually say these things, and even fewer who actually believe them.

Uh huh...I'm glad you think so.

These are usually the folks who despise me because at some point in time, I made them look foolish.

Its like clockwork. You pull the cord and the unalloyed narcissism masking deep self esteem concerns flows from his lips. You never disappoint.

On the other hand, I call numerous intellectuals "friends" who hail from both the LDS and critical sides of the fence. You caannot say the same.

You have no idea what you're talking about. But then, that's never mattered to you before.

So please, stop projecting by pretending I share your credibility status in the apologetic world.

You have no credibility in the apologetic world. You are not an apologist, but a posturing neurotic on a mission of self justification to redeem your apostasy from what your knew, and still may know, is the truth. You are in an all out war with your own conscience, and its driven you mad, in a way, as such a condition has many apostates before you.

Anyone who calls me "angry" does so because they need to.

Good heavens! How deep can your delusional state actually be! At what level of unreality are you actually functioning? Or can one even call this "functioning?"

Anyone trying to say Taylor didn't lie has to be nuts.

But that's what you say about each and every point you make, on each and every subject in each and every thread post you make. Its stock and trade with you. You're smarter than anyone who disagrees with you, and you're surrounded by idiots. How long is this Kafkaesque pose going to go on?

You're just one of those poorly educated guys who thinks he can compensate for this deficiency or impress certain folks by regurgitating mantra with a thesaurus in one hand and a FAIR Journal (or Mises subscription) in the other.

You see, this is just your own regurgitated can't' scraped off the bottom of the barrel and flung at an opponent. You talk self serving nonsense such as this, project like hell (you are, in matters political and philosophical, among the most poorly read people I've ever engaged, and it shows Graham, not only in your arguments and assertions, but in the fact that you are continually reminding everyone how smart you are. If you really were, you wouldn't have to beat your breast about it all the time. It would be obvious), and then try to slink away with big puppy dog eyes as if you're the victim.

But I can't think of anyone, apologist or critic, who thinks you're anything more than a joke.

I can, and I talk to them. As for you, next time you link me to Worker's World or a Huffington Post op-ed as a serious source of political commentary in support of your own arguments, I hope folks remember that you are the smart one...

So keep attacking me, it only makes me look better.

All I need to do, in the normal case, is copy and paste a list of the ad hominem attacks you throw out per thread (and if the post is lengthy, we're probably talking about a couple dozen or more of them), for perusal.

We can all then see how that makes you look.

[Guest]

Droopy,

Another unfortunate choice of words for your thread title.

You apparently don't realize that "Terminal Phase" ends in one or many thermonuclear detonation(s).

(Don't laugh - look it up.)

So if your unintended analogy holds, you and your fellow apologists are in for some "Thermonuclear Kevin".

I for one, can hardly wait.

[_mms]

Droopy,

Did John Taylor lie on behalf of, or in order to "protect," the Church?

mms

[_Droopy]

Even DCP thinks Droopy is a joke. He said as much in his recent Mormon Stories interview.

That's a great interview, and I have to say that I agreed with just about 100% of what Daniel had to say. The one thing I didn't hear, was my screen name. Nor did I hear the name of a single apologist on the message boards in the section where he speaks about his participation on them.

I wonder if you could provide a link to where he says "Droopy is a joke," in "so many words" or otherwise.

[_Droopy]

Droopy,

Another unfortunate choice of words for your thread title.

You apparently don't realize that "Terminal Phase" ends in one or many thermonuclear detonation(s).

(Don't laugh - look it up.)

I was well aware of that when I used it.

So if your unintended analogy holds, you and your fellow apologists are in for some "Thermonuclear Kevin".

Yes, but only his own detonation and consequent self destruction. That's the point.

[_Droopy]

Droopy,

Did John Taylor lie on behalf of, or in order to "protect," the Church?

mms

No. He evaded and attempted to deflect the issue, it would appear, but I see no evidence that he lied.

[_Buffalo]

Droopy,

Did John Taylor lie on behalf of, or in order to "protect," the Church?

mms

No. He evaded and attempted to deflect the issue, it would appear, but I see no evidence that he lied.

I think it's fair to say that Bill Clinton was more honest about his sex life than John Taylor.

We are accused here of polygamy, and actions the most indelicate, obscene, and disgusting, such that none but a corrupt and depraved heart could have contrived. These things are too outrageous to admit of belief; therefore leaving the sisters of the "White Veil," the "Black Veil," and all the other veils, with those gentlemen to dispose of, together with their authors, as they think best, I shall content myself by reading our views of chastity and marriage, from a work published by us, containing some of the articles of our Faith. "Doctrine and Covenants," page 330.

[_mms]

The lack of candor is and has been so troubling for me. It continues. Why can a lie not be called a lie? Droopy would be the first to say that a critic of the Church who "evaded" and "attempted to deflect" in the manner Taylor did was not guilty of "evading" or "attempting to deflect" but of lying. Why can he not admit it of a past prophet? The unwillingness to admit it indicates to many that if it is true, it must be extremely harmful to the cause of the defenders of the faith. I remember when I first learned of the Church's attempts to present only a favorable history bgy ignoring the troubling aspects of its history. I thought to myself, "Man, they (apostles and prophets) must think that the troubling aspects of the history are sooooooooooo bad. Why else would they go to such effort to present only a favorable history and risk being seen as not forthcoming?"