re: For those who haven't heard of Frank DiPrima.........Let me Introduce AggieHank's boy

quote:

---

In your rage-filled, swirling, TDS-addled brain, you REALLY think your opinion of someone matters, don't you?

---

Well, we ARE discussing a poster who is convinced that in lurk in the shadows in utter fear of him, diligently checking his profile's online status, so that I can post responses to him when he has left the computer.

quote:

---

From WHAT?

---

Egg on your face.

At least VoxDawg owned his shite yesterday, and his was a more egregious misstep tbh.

quote:

---

A poster for whom I have exactly ZERO respect asked me a series of questions. Rather than ignoring him (which is often my response to his inanity), I answered each of his questions. I did not go out of my way to seek and provide additional information for him

---

Queen Hank's face is obviously turning red at this point....

quote:

---

quote:

---

From WHAT?

---

Egg on your face.

---

I have no problem admitted mistakes/errors.

I had actually started typing a mea culpa when Shorty posted the wrong date on the Tillerson debacle, but something told me to double-check.

I am glad that I did so, but I would have had no problem admitting an error.

This entire circus revolves around the fact that (1) I think Trump is an idiot savant and that this fact PROBABLY somewhat influences my acceptance of the DiPrimo account and (2) everyone else on this thread worships him to at least some extent and thus discounts the DiPrimo account.

It is EXACTLY those facts which lead Shorty to attribute to me motives which simply to do not exist.

I can actually live with the erroneous analysis. People reach different conclusions from the same facts all the time. The annoying factor is his REPEATED misstatements and mischaracterizations of my prior posts. Even when I cut/paste my ACTUAL WORDS, he continues to engage in the same behavior.

quote:

---

It's obvious Hank is a raging narcissist.....

Check the tenor of his posts...

---

I am respectful of posters who provide intelligent input, regardless of whether I agree with their conclusions. I am respectful of posters who are not particularly bright but who do not pretend to be MENSA candidates. I do not attack any poster who does not attack me first.

But, yes, I am quite dismissive of posters who are not bright but who DO pretend to be MENSA candidates and who engage in personal attacks upon me for no reason other than the supposition that I am an ideological opponent. I make no apologies for that.

quote:

---

raging narcissist

---

Someone learned a new word recently.

quote:

---

Someone learned a new word recently.

---

Yes...."raging" was on a Word a Day calendar I found in the dumpster.....

quote:

---

I have no problem admitted mistakes/errors.

---

Sometimes. I've seen you correct yourself sometimes, and others (like right now), you obstinately cling to something you know is a bad look for you, and honestly isn't worth the back and forth over something a simple "my bad, shitty source" would prevent. You like the conflict, which is fine. I'm the same on some things. But don't pretend you always back off when you should. The opposite is closer to your M.O.

quote:

---

This entire circus revolves around the fact that (1) I think Trump is an idiot savant and that this fact PROBABLY somewhat influences my acceptance of the DiPrimo account

---

"Probably somewhat"? Gee....ya think?

quote:

---

everyone else on this thread worships him to at least some extent 

---

Wrong. Not even close to true.

Unless you'd like to back that up with something concrete. Remember I've been in this thread since p2. I don't think you want to levy that claim at me. You know that won't end well.

quote:

---

I discount DiPrimo's account for two rather obvious reasons.

1. He makes Don Lemon look rational when it comes to Trump

2. One should ALWAYS question fortuitously timed recollections from people who are fricking irrational on the given subject. Really, fortuitously timed recollections period.

---

Let's examine this.

Kelley died in 2011.

If DiPrimo wanted to fabricate a lie about Trump's intelligence, would it not have been just as easy to do so during the campaign in 2016 as to do so in late 2017? Might it not have served a greater purpose (in the mind of the purported liar) to fabricate such a lie during a Presidential primary or general election campaign than at a comparatively-unimportant time a year later?

Is it not MORE credible that Trump's insults of Tillerson and claims of genius-level intellect in 2017 might have given rise to a desire to publish Kelley's opinions regarding his former student?

Just a thought.