This installment of Narcissist of the Week (NotW) comes a bit early, but with a series of performances so stunning there is no possibility it could be outdone. Maybe added to, but never outdone. With a veritable narcissism trifecta, who could possibly hold a candle to this bright and shining spotlight?

First up Julie brilliantly defends her literary approach to the Gospel of Mark by steadfastly and articulately crushing all naysayers beneath her feet. Since she is right, and she knows she is right, why listen to anyone else, let alone respond to their inane and banal questions? I know I wouldn't, because I am right, all the time, no matter what.

Then, Julie slaps down DMI Dave in the comments on an ExpoII thread, and takes it on over to a full-fledged post on T&S to give Dave the drubbing he deserves, and so none of her adoring fans will miss her sublime ingenuity in the comments of a relatively obscure blog. Heck yeah, that is so totally what I would have done. I mean, T&S is there as her personal pedestal, to bask in her glory, so why not use it to flail the enemies of righteousness and correct interpretations? Similar to the her performance in the Leprous Temple thread noted above, she handily makes her point and dispatches all naysayers. Why be gracious, when you are right, and it is all his fault?

Finally, Julie deigns to shows forth her exemplary erudition in New Testament scholarship by endorsing a book that would be acceptable for pedestrain laymen, like the typical unin[it]iated Bloggernacle reader. Ah, what a breath of fresh air! Natch, Julie points out all of the problems with the text, having spotted them all, owing to her obvious expertise in the subject, so as to spare the dullards of the Bloggernacle any confusion or doubt over being misinformed. Grateful we are, Julie! May you always lead us into the paths of defensible non-free-for-all scriptural interpretations! After I get my copy, will you personally sign it with a glowing endorsement (less the bad bits, which I will allow you to personally comment on in the margins)?

All Hail Julie M. Smith, Paragon of Charity, Diplomacy and Brilliant Exegesis!

She will be an example to us all, forever and always.


Steve EM said... @ October 11, 2006 at 1:55 PM

Somebody isn't getting laid.

Anonymous said... @ October 11, 2006 at 2:40 PM

Is it just me or has T&S been kind of a ghost town lately? BCC has been jumping, and FMH is clearly breaking away from the pack, but T&S...?

Is T&S even as relevant as M* these days? Can someone look into this? Seems like more is going on at the now retired Mormon Stories than T&S.

Anonymous said... @ October 11, 2006 at 3:30 PM

If it weren't for the guest bloggers, T&S would be totally substance free.

Anonymous said... @ October 11, 2006 at 3:59 PM

I'm sorry to hear that steve em. Better luck in the future.

Anonymous said... @ October 11, 2006 at 5:53 PM

What a surprise.

Kurt argues with Julie a lot as the Voyuer.

He loses.

He then posts about why he thinks Julie sucks, as the Snarker. Or the Narcisist. Or whoever he's being today.

Get the Dorito involved, too! Bring out all of Kurt's sock puppets! We love puppets!

Kurt said... @ October 11, 2006 at 6:49 PM

Oh, look, a T&S permabore is posting anonymously and using IP addresses to out people. Gee, I wonder if this is the same T&S permabore who advocated boycotting SnarkerNacle and then submitted snarks? If I tracked IPs I guess I could out him too.

Yes, I posted as The Voyeur, since it is well know I am not a friend of T&S and the collection of geniuses that run it.

I lost? Give me a break. Julie sticking her fingers in her ears shouting "Neener neener neener! I cant hear you!!!" is her kicking my but with the power of her awe inspiring intellect. If I lost, she wouldnt have sat there repeating herself saying "I dont want to talk to you" over and over again. She would have responded intelligently instead.

Her speculative "literary" interpretations are total crap, and an act of unadulterated hypocrisy when she attacks DMI Dave for not being allegedly rigorous in his exegesis, even though she cannot support her allegations of his lack of rigor.

You mock me for sock puppetry while posting anonymously? You are a hypocrite and a coward.

Anonymous coward #2. Having a Masters Degree in Biblical Studies entitles you to shovel total crap and it turns into gold when it hits the Bloggernacle? Not even. Her stuff is crap, and anyone who cannot see that is blind. Credentialism is meaningless.

As for my credentials, I will put my stuff up against Julie's any day of the week.

P.S., its nice to see the T&S permadolts come out and support their own. Good to see you all stick together. We'll stick together here, as we continue to expose you self-promoting jerks for the frauds you are.

Anonymous said... @ October 11, 2006 at 6:51 PM

FWIW, I think Julie is just jealous of DMI Dave, so she attacks him over nothing and then posts book reviews like he does. Lamers.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ October 11, 2006 at 8:03 PM

Hi Anonymous Permabores, sorry, but you are going to have to login now, since you love anonymous trolling so much.

And this post is not about Kurt, it is about Julie's awful behavior. Slander Kurt if you like, but he did not have anything to do at all with Julie's irrational attack on DMI Dave or her vain exercise in total conceit in the form of a book review. So, even if you want to throw out Kurt raking Julie over the coals, you still have Julie acting like a true prima donna.

Anonymous said... @ October 12, 2006 at 5:00 PM

Julie is a bore.

Stephen M (Ethesis) said... @ October 12, 2006 at 7:24 PM

I know it is tempting to take shots at Julie, but I enjoy her writing.

Post a Comment