Blogger interviews dude who posted temple ceremony..Romney

[_Eric]

This from a guy who bags on others' writing when he can't form a coherent sentence that a first-grader could. A FIRST-GRADER! You seriously need to talk to your bishop about that hatred. In your heart.

Well what is it? First or third grade?

Seriously, though, you're the first person in recent memory to accuse me of bad writing, so I think I'm okay.

But then again, I didn't go to the sociopath/universally-hated-Internet-personality message boards to pimp my nonsensical ramblings, so maybe my approach is too risk averse.


And for the fiftieth time, I don't have a Bishop. This is not a believer forum.

[_ldsdreams]

This from a guy who bags on others' writing when he can't form a coherent sentence that a first-grader could. A FIRST-GRADER! You seriously need to talk to your bishop about that hatred. In your heart.

Well what is it? First or third grade?

Seriously, though, you're the first person in recent memory to accuse me of bad writing, so I think I'm okay.

But then again, I didn't go to the sociopath/universally-hated-Internet-personality message boards to pimp my nonsensical ramblings, so maybe my approach is too risk averse.

You're right. Third grade was far too generous. First grade it is. Thank you for bringing that discrepancy to my attention.

Did you mean "risk adverse," perchance? There you go ripping on others when your proverbial house is not in order.

Again I point you to this, since you can't grasp reality:

http://www.michaelcrook.org/2012/07/24/ ... -for-life/

Seems to me that if you're still offended by things of the past, you need help for psychosis. In short: GET OVER IT!

[_Kishkumen]

Did you mean "risk adverse," perchance?

Guffaw.

[_Eric]

Did you mean "risk adverse," perchance?

Nope. LOL!

[_ldsdreams]

Did you mean "risk adverse," perchance?

Nope. LOL!

Why no you didn't. Fair enough. However, the concept of risk aversion does not apply in this situation. This is just another superfluous, and rather pathetic, childish and suspicious attempt on your part to deflect from your own shortcomings and failures, particularly in the area of getting the fu** over stuff written years ago. To me, that screams "psychopath" more than anything you've mentioned.

Seriously, you and people like you are still butthurt over things written years ago. Get over it.

[_Eric]

Why no you didn't. Fair enough.

LOL. This has been fun.

[_Emily]

Did you mean "risk adverse," perchance?

Chortle. If one waits long enough, you always entertain, Michael.

[_ldsdreams]

Why no you didn't. Fair enough.

LOL. This has been fun.

Indeed. You've proven yourself to be an unforgiving, childish fool who pathetically clings to writings that were published years and years ago. Thanks for proving your weak and pathetic nature.

[_Kishkumen]

Thanks for proving your weak and pathetic nature.

Eric, is he accusing you of lacking Aryan blood?

I hope that's true!

[_Eric]

Indeed. You've proven yourself to be an unforgiving, childish fool who pathetically clings to writings that were published years and years ago. Thanks for proving your weak and pathetic nature.

What I'm hearing is that you are ashamed of some of the things you've said and done in the past. That's good. You should be.