In which Robert makes me vomit in my mouth

[thoughtful]

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

I wonder if it would make him crazy if we did this every time he got suspicious that some commenter was from FJ (substitute "Mike" or whatever name he suspects, of course):

[bBvideo 560,340:3u22b383]

[/bBvideo]

[usmcmom]

Robert, all joking aside; I appreciate the apology and I gladly accept.

I'd like to encourage you to rethink some of your correspondence and friendships. First, you had Lori who apparently totally misrepresented your marriage story. Now, you have somebody who is insisting that one of your commenters is completely different than who they really are. Who are you allowing to influence you?

You insist that members of FJ are welcome to comment on your blog if we meet your requirements. I don't understand why, since you are clearly reading here (or being given a play-by-play) you don't just address us yourself. You claim we are trying to "sneak in" to your comment section by being untruthful. Isn't that what you are doing when you address comments here in such a roundabout way? Aren't you trying "sneak" into the conversation without really being present? Rest assured, I will never try to comment on your blog. You are rude to commenters who hold the slightest difference of opinion, just as Lori is. You tend to edge your responses with a threat like "you're on a short leash..."

Finally, I am astonished that "Mike's" comment did not occur to you as someone who was simply summing up several points they'd read here. Yes, many of the points were mine, but that's what the internet allows - for people to gather words quickly and put them anywhere they want. If someone went to Lori's blog and gathered your comments, then posted them elsewhere, we'd recognize your words and could easily accuse you of trolling on any number of sites.

I dare say, Robert, that you allowed your behavior today to be controlled by emotions. Isn't that something that you believe to be wrong?

edited for typo

[usmcmom]

So now that Robert threw such a fit about Mike/USCMOM - heh - I've gone back and read through some more of the comments. This is from the Christmas post. It's really funny to see Robert respond to Mike's DELETED comments.

Lastly, my comment policy is that you can disagree with me- even strongly as long as it’s respectful. However, when commenting to another commentor- especially a woman- I use my discretion to protect their heads & hearts from comments that would undermine their faith or spouse.

Anyway, does anybody else think Robert has a funny way of protecting women's heads and hearts? He's so crude. There's the post about "nut-cutting day." He's constantly telling men to "have some balls." He asked his wife if he was a "Dick head." He vulgarly pointed out another woman's breasts to his wife and connected it to when she "gives him some." He insists that cussing makes him a man. He wrote an entire poste on "what lies between a woman's thighs." He proudly proclaims that he is a "48-hour guy," and that's how often he will get ENTHUSIASTIC sex. He proudly advises his male readers that a wife needs to be pretty enough so he "can get it up at night." And he encourages his female as to what kind of lingerie they should wear at Christmas. Oh and he wrote an entire post on his wife's hormones and proclaimed that he liked her best when she acted like his mistress. What am I forgetting?

Then he chastises a reader for being insensitive to female readers.

I'm so glad I'm married to a real man who is a true gentleman.

amanhiswifethebible.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/christmas/#comments

[Firiel]

This happened

Robert. We don't USE donotlink clicks with you. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially for someone getting as little traffic as you do.

Unless he doesn't know his shit and is actually talking about links that are copy/pasted into the browser?

[usmcmom]

I like Mike's response.

Mike

— December 7, 2014 at 9:07 pm

There was a play by play? Who is USCMOM? I don’t think I recall anyone by that name commenting here. This is what a 51 year old gets for getting involved with the internet, I guess.

Anyway, it’s apparent that we disagree on several key things, and that’s fine. I like conversation, but hate arguing. I’ve got a beautiful wife who is a stronger Christian than anyone I’ve ever met and three wonderful daughters who (God willing) will turn out like their mother. And I’ve done it all with feelings and with neither of us undermining the other.

From now on, I think I will stick to coaching my girls’ sports teams. Less drama than on the worldwide web!

I like how he agrees with us that Robert creates more drama than a bunch of teenage girls.

[lawfulevil]

Robert. We don't USE donotlink clicks with you. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially for someone getting as little traffic as you do.

Unless he doesn't know his shit and is actually talking about links that are copy/pasted into the browser?

I think it's more likely he's being discussed on another snark site or Lori's private FB group or something. I checked GOMI, and Robert doesn't rate (not surprised, Bob is no Zsuzsu/PP). But it's not like I know every snark site on the web. No, really!

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

It wouldn't shock me if it were LorKen, they seem like the kind of people to be sparkly to your face and stab you in the back. Bob frequently doesn't agree with Ken, which we all know is at least a venial sin in penis-owners.

[salex]

Cm. Note: sweet and sweat are not the same.

Peek and peak are not the same. Spellchecker will not tell you this, but I will.

[polecat]

Robert. We don't USE donotlink clicks with you. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially for someone getting as little traffic as you do.

Unless he doesn't know his shit and is actually talking about links that are copy/pasted into the browser?

I was wondering about that but didn't care enough to go back and look at the thread to see if anyone had put up a donotclick link or not.

BUT some weeks ago, I did suggest using donotclick. However, since Boobert doesn't read here, I can't even begin to imagine how he'd know such a thing.

[usmcmom]

Am I going crazy or did Robert delete Mike's last comment? :?

He just keeps shooting down readers right and left doesn't he? Even if Mike wasn't real, it just seems to me that the smart thing to do would be to answer his comments anyway; that at least allows Robert to get his viewpoints out there, right? If I suspected a troll on my blog, I'd think "Eh...probably fake, but my opinion is genuine so I'll respond."

I've given this a little thought since last night. If Mike was fake could it have been Ken sending the comment, then pointing out how Mike sounded just like USCMOM? (Acki...it's painful to type it like Robert does). I have no doubt that Ken and Lori disparage Robert outside of blog land and I think they love the idea of stirring up trouble between him and FJ.

If Mike is real, maybe, JUST MAYBE, he happened to have the same thoughts as though of us here on FJ who commented along the same lines. Validation, reflective listening and empathy are not such rare concepts that WE are the only ones who would come up with them.

I've also been thinking about the many times I've wanted to give Robert the benefit of the doubt. So many times, I've thought "maybe he's just a poor communicator," or "maybe if he clarified that, I'd see his point better." I've even read his comments here many times, looking for ways in which I could prove he's not that bad. But, I find nothing; and when he reacts so hysterically to prove he's right, to the point of accusing the wrong person, well all I can conclude is what I've thought all along...Robert is indeed a seventh-grade girl*.

Finally, I think Robert refuses to type USMCMOM just to push my buttons. He thinks he can get a rise out of me if he labels me a university mom instead of a military mom. The Marine is always there, Robert; whether you want to give credit or not.

*My sincerest apologies to seventh-grade girls. You all are great, really!

[browncoatslytherin]

I was wondering about that but didn't care enough to go back and look at the thread to see if anyone had put up a donotclick link or not.

BUT some weeks ago, I did suggest using donotclick. However, since Boobert doesn't read here, I can't even begin to imagine how he'd know such a thing.

right? i'd never even heard of it until you posted about it here, and i've been around the block a time or two as far as the internet is concerned...not that i'm an expert, but i've heard of and seen quite a bit.

[polecat]

I received an email from one of the friendly FJ’ers telling me USCMOM is saying this wasn’t her. Mike, I have sent you an email to the email address you provided. USCMOM, even the woman who emailed me (not COD) wasn’t sure if you were being honest as she says Mike’s post sounds almost exactly like something you said (I have asked for a screen shot and I’ll see if she gets back to me)- but I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt until then and admit that I was wrong. The IP’s don’t match up from your earlier comments. I cannot get on FJ anymore because I have it blocked on my computer (Amanda has the password) and your old email looks like a phony- so this is the only way I know to contact you. I am sorry for accusing you of trying to slip through the comments. Mike, I also apologize to you.

To you and all FJ’ers, I know you still read here because of the donotlink clicks. WordPress tracks every single time you use that. You don’t have to try and slip through the comment section to make up new names. If you want to converse about something email me or Amanda. Our emails are listed at the top of the screen under how to contact us. As I’ve said before, if you apolagize (repent if you claim to be a christian) and stop posting at FJ you are welcome to comment here, otherwise email will have to do if you have a concern.

I've noticed that when people lie, their lies can get really convoluted really fast. They also tend to over-explain every little detail. Instead of just saying, "Oh, sorry, I just assumed you were USMCmom because your writing styles were simliar," CM goes off into a two paragraph tirade of all sorts of weird, random explanations (someone emailed me, Amanda monitors my Internet usage, I know it's FJ because links that I only know of because of FJ but I don't read there y'all, apolAgize, REPENT!, stop posting elsewhere, WordPress knows everything, Christian, God, ME, etc.)

Now, I'm not saying Bureau Britches would ever ever actually LIE because that's one of the 10 commandments and we all know he's a super Christian. I'm just saying that he has a lot of characteristics of lying, and, well, since good Christians are supposed to eschew even the APPEARANCE of evil, maybe L. Ron Cupboard should reassess his delivery.

[browncoatslytherin]

I've noticed that when people lie, their lies can get really convoluted really fast. They also tend to over-explain every little detail. Instead of just saying, "Oh, sorry, I just assumed you were USMCmom because your writing styles were simliar," CM goes off into a two paragraph tirade of all sorts of weird, random explanations (someone emailed me, Amanda monitors my Internet usage, I know it's FJ because links that I only know of because of FJ but I don't read there y'all, apolAgize, REPENT!, stop posting elsewhere, WordPress knows everything, Christian, God, ME, etc.)

Now, I'm not saying Bureau Britches would ever ever actually LIE because that's one of the 10 commandments and we all know he's a super Christian. I'm just saying that he has a lot of characteristics of lying, and, well, since good Christians are supposed to eschew even the APPEARANCE of evil, maybe L. Ron Cupboard should reassess his delivery.

also, does anyone wanna fess up to e-mailing him about it? because if no one will, it just further proves that he reads here. even though he totally doesn't, you guys. gawd must beam this information directly into his brain. :roll:

[formergothardite]

I wonder if the "friendly FJ member" who contacted Robert is the same one who contacted Ken to say that she sneaks away from FJ and reads Lori's blog for the good advice. :shifty-kitty:

[thoughtful]

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

Oy, Robert -- such a fuss.

He did say he has someone monitor FJ for him, which is no different, to me, from reading here.

Not sure why he doesn't just read here himself -- maybe he's afraid he'll get obsessed with threads about the Duggar daughters' fashion choices. :wink-kitty:

[church_of_dog]

I've also been thinking about the many times I've wanted to give Robert the benefit of the doubt. So many times, I've thought "maybe he's just a poor communicator," or "maybe if he clarified that, I'd see his point better." I've even read his comments here many times, looking for ways in which I could prove he's not that bad. But, I find nothing; and when he reacts so hysterically to prove he's right, to the point of accusing the wrong person, well all I can conclude is what I've thought all along...Robert is indeed a seventh-grade girl*.

That's what I have thought, and pretty much still think.

Robert emailed me last night to apologize apolagize for revealing information I gave him in an email, on his blog. I responded and told him that while it wasn't "nice" to reveal that information, he had that right and in fact I had done the same to him, revealed what he had told me in emails (in fact I'm doing it again here). But, I explained, he had changed my statement and that was what was deceitful -- I had said to him that I didn't always agree with everything that was written on FJ, including about him. He twisted that to that "I believe FJ is wrong about him." So I had to explain that difference to him, "sometimes" does not equal "always". I also told him that in spite of the snark, FJ'ers are (if I might generalize) mostly concerned for Amanda's wellbeing. I told him that I didn't think he was actually abusive to his wife but that his writing is poor enough, and steeped sufficiently in machismo language, that it gives the appearance otherwise. He wrote back and of course missed my point entirely, listing all the people in his life who have attested to his nonabusiveness... Oh well, I tried.

[polecat]

I wonder if the "friendly FJ member" who contacted Robert is the same one who contacted Ken to say that she sneaks away from FJ and reads Lori's blog for the good advice. :shifty-kitty:

Maybe they're each other's "friendly FJ members." CM sneaks off to Lori's blog, and Ken emails CM to tattle on FJ.

But you know what? I don't even think they're honest enough for that. I think they're both flat-out lying. :naughty:

[browncoatslytherin]

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

Oy, Robert -- such a fuss.

He did say he has someone monitor FJ for him, which is no different, to me, from reading here.

Not sure why he doesn't just read here himself -- maybe he's afraid he'll get obsessed with threads about the Duggar daughters' fashion choices. :wink-kitty:

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

i wonder if that "someone" is a member here...so if they e-mail him, he can sorta kinda truthfully say that a "friendly fj member" e-mailed him about this or that. it's still deceptive, though, imo. truth by word only, not by any implication.

[church_of_dog]

Cm. Note: sweet and sweat are not the same.

Peek and peak are not the same. Spellchecker will not tell you this, but I will.

From the John Wayne post: "tough talk in a salon" :lol: :lol: :banana-dreads: :banana-blonde:

[formergothardite]

Maybe they're each other's "friendly FJ members." CM sneaks off to Lori's blog, and Ken emails CM to tattle on FJ.

But you know what? I don't even think they're honest enough for that. I think they're both flat-out lying. :naughty:

Oh Ken for sure was flat out lying because he could never explain why a member here would need to sneak off and read Lori's blog. Not only do lots of members read Lori's blog but even if they didn't it isn't like Curious can track what websites members look at.

[browncoatslytherin]

Oh Ken for sure was flat out lying because he could never explain why a member here would need to sneak off and read Lori's blog. Not only do lots of members read Lori's blog but even if they didn't it isn't like Curious can track what websites members look at.

goggle tactics

[jerkit]

Lorken and Boobert: I unashamedly read your blogs daily. No sneaking necessary.

ETA: multiple times per day. I stalk your comments sections like white on rice.

[polecat]

goggle tactics

L. Ron:

:liar1: :liar1: :liar1: :liar1:

Ken:

[formergothardite]

goggle tactics

I forgot that Curious has the goggle tactics and knows all I do on the internet. And since Ken and Robert are members here too, she now knows all about their internet lives too. :lol:

[usmcmom]

I have read this paragraph a dozen times and still can't quite make heads or tails of it.

Mike,

I received an email from one of the friendly FJ’ers telling me USCMOM is saying this wasn’t her. Mike, I have sent you an email to the email address you provided. USCMOM, even the woman who emailed me (not COD) wasn’t sure if you were being honest as she says Mike’s post sounds almost exactly like something you said (I have asked for a screen shot and I’ll see if she gets back to me)- but I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt until then and admit that I was wrong. The IP’s don’t match up from your earlier comments. I cannot get on FJ anymore because I have it blocked on my computer (Amanda has the password) and your old email looks like a phony- so this is the only way I know to contact you. I am sorry for accusing you of trying to slip through the comments. Mike, I also apologize to you.

Mismatched IP's, phony old email, earlier comments??? It's all rather exciting and mysterious, isn't it?

Robert would be surprised to discover that when I commented on his blog before, we had pleasant exchanges and he never once felt the need to "keep me on a short leash."

[lawfulevil]

That's a pity. All that goat porn. Poor Curious.