People need to stop making stuff up to make Trump look bad

[iiandyiiii]

@doorhinge

You’re proud

Oh happy day, when every post from you to me is a gift in which we can celebrate and play together in the electronic ether (represented by honey, perhaps, for you)! For I honor and praise you for openly discussing your honey-clad-firemen fantasies – we are great friends who can enjoy the world and all its pleasures, even if my pleasures have less to do with bee vomit and heroic civil servants.

I look forward to you, doorhinge, my very fine friend, continuing this celebration and joyful discussion of your deepest and most honey-covered manly desires. I am proud indeed to continue to share this with you!

[VinylTurnip]

@iiandyiiii

Indeed! We can both be proud of being the humans that we are. Not everyone loves honey, but you do, and that’s okay. Not everyone loves firemen, but you do, and that’s okay. Enjoy yourself, and your desires, with any and every adult who consents, and be very proud indeed of who you are!

You should run for office. You’ve got doorhinge’s vote, if you lie often enough.

[msmith537]

@Blinkyandpinky

Yes, your side is so brilliant that it hasn’t been in this bad political shape in many, many decades. You’ve lost everything. Both houses & the presidency. Good job. You can probably thank Obama for that, because this has been in the works for years.

You couldn’t even beat Trump, you know, the guy that you lot have been making fun of ever since he first announced that he was running.

Who are the real dummies here?

I am quite content with being on my side, and you can be happy together with all of the geniuses and mentally unstable, violent freaks on your side.

Trump’s win is a victory for stupid people everywhere.

[Knowed_Out]

@doorhinge

Why would anyone want to insult you? You’re harmless.

a-hem - “Like everybody says”? Really? That’s just silly. Have you even met everybody? Did everybody actually tell you that? Did you mean “everybody”, or “everybody” who has supplied you with pictures of naked farm animals?

So who is this “everybody” you were referring to?

Oh, everybody else in this thread besides you. You know, the ones calling you troll, idiot, ceiling fan starer, fist eater…

You’re still sticking with *naked *farm animals? Do you not see that farm animals are already naked?

Are you developmentally disabled? You’re like a child learning how to curse for the first time. You’re not sure what the words mean, but you think using them makes you sound cool.

[doorhinge]

@Knowed_Out

Oh, everybody else in this thread besides you. You know, the ones calling you troll, idiot, ceiling fan starer, fist eater…

(post shortened)

Haters gotta hate. That’s what they do.

The question then is whether or not the target of the haters should care if some hater sitting in their mom’s basement, surrounded by empty pizza boxes, and straining to look thru their spittle covered PC screen, is to be taken seriously. I would like to thank you for submitting your posts for consideration but, seriously dude, you suck. Thanks for playing.

[iiandyiiii]

@doorhinge

you suck. Thanks

You go my friend! Sucking is the right of all consenting adults. Suck that honey off those firemen as much as you want! Be the true person that doorhinge was meant to be, and don’t worry about all those haters!

[SteveG1]

haters gonna hate, taters gonna tate.

[Knowed_Out]

@doorhinge

(post not shortened)

Haters gotta hate. That’s what they do.

The question then is whether or not the target of the haters should care if some hater sitting in their mom’s basement, surrounded by empty pizza boxes, and straining to look thru their spittle covered PC screen, is to be taken seriously. I would like to thank you for submitting your posts for consideration but, seriously dude, you suck. Thanks for playing.

“Thanks for playing” was overused 20 years ago. If you’re going to copy and paste, at least use something more recent.

So, you ever going to respond to post 96? For some reason you keep resorting to bitter behavior whenever we ask you to clarify your remarks.

[El_Kabong]

@SteveG1

haters gonna hate, taters gonna tate.

Doors gonna hinge.

[doorhinge]

for historical reference -

@doorhinge

I see no reason why the Democrat collective should stop jumping on every opportunity to trash Trump. It’s what they know, love, and do best. Look how well they used this tactic to insure Hillary’s election.

Every false story dilutes the effect of any true story but “they” just can’t stop themselves. People/voters grow tired of all the whining. How will the people/voters respond to this constant barrage of fake/false/phony “news” stories in the future? The all-inclusive-party-who-will-attack-anyone-including-other-Democrats-if-they-choose-to-question-their-candidates-goodness has been steadily losing ground for eight years.

I say they should keep up the good work.

(underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

Fake news is fake news. Wouldn’t it be great if there were some organizations that we the people could count on to provide us with all of the facts, and only the facts. You know, something like the main stream media outlets we have now, but truthful, honest, and unbiased. Fake news can only exist in a society that allows it’s media to help spread fake news instead of providing accurate, and honest reporting.

(post shortened, underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

Fake news is fake news. It’s my position that news media outlets need to do a much, much, much better job of reporting the news. What we the people need are organizations that can actually verify the questionable/fake news stories that are being circulated via the internet, news producing TV shows, talk radio hype, pundits, spin doctors, etc…

(post shortened, underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

I’ve always enjoyed your syphilitic ramblings. It’s my position that the news media outlets should be doing a much, much better job of reporting the news. I expect to see the Who, What, Where, Why, and When of every story that the news media produces. You may find such facts to be a hindrance. It certainly seems as if the Democrat Party leaders do.

If the main stream media did a proper job of vetting the news stories they chose to produce, fake news would limited to the Facebook-types, and DNC/MSNBC.

(underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

I’m familiar with iiandyiiii’s inability to read what I actually wrote and respond with anything resembling the truth, but your post seems to indicate that you simply can’t understand a complete thought. It’s my position that the news media outlets should be doing a much, much better job of reporting the news. I expect to see the Who, What, Where, Why, and When of every story that the news media produces.

(post shortened, underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

(post shortened)

It was complete. You can’t accept that. I can.

You can demand that the news media outlets do a better job of reporting the truth, and nothing but the truth. Or not.

You can demand that the news media outlets supply the Who, What, Where, Why, and When of every story they produce. Or not.

You could even advocate for the necessity of piss-poor journalism and fake news, if you so chose. I believe the news outlets can do a better job than they’ve been doing.

(underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

None of them. They all want to be the first to report a story, regardless of the facts. Being accurate is 2nd. Most of the time.

I’ve imposed a personal 48 hour moratorium on accepting any information from the news media outlets ON ANY MAJOR STORY. Eventually, most of the facts will be reported, and I miss all of the sturm und drang that’s meant to sell advertising.

It’s my position that the news media outlets should be doing a much, much better job of reporting the news. “THAT” is my position. The Democrat collective is having difficulty understanding this simple statement. They seem to see what they want to see. Which is not my problem.

(underline added)
for historical reference -

@doorhinge

If things were different, things would be different. Assholes like yourself are repeatedly asking me to defend positions that I do not hold. Eventually, maybe, it’s going to occur to you that I actually meant to say what I actually said. Well, not you, but I have high hopes for the rest.

for historical reference -

@doorhinge

I want the news media outlets to provide the Who, What, Where, Why, and When of every story they produce. Even you could spot fake news stories with that information at your fingertips.

(post shortened)

for historical reference -

@doorhinge

I listen to/watch all of the news media outlets, including CSPAN, NPR, AP, and BBC. I’m a notorious channel changer. When they chose to run commercials, I chose to change the channel/station.

Regardless of the news media outlet, not every news story is handled in a slipshod, rush-to-judgment manner. Even MSNBC and RT/Russia Today.

The news media outlets are often correct, eventually.

It’s my position that THEY CAN ALL DO A BETTER JOB than what they have been doing.

for historical reference -
Post 96 -

@Knowed_Out

OK doorhinge, let’s take a look at a typical news media outlet story.

Retired general says Trump’s defense of Putin is ‘the most anti-American statement ever made’ by a president

Who: Donald Trump, Barry McCaffrey
What: McCaffrey objects to Trump’s defense of Vladimir Putin
Where: An interview with Bill O’Reilly of FOX News
Why: “To confuse American values with Putin, who’s running a criminal oligarchy, who kills people abroad and at home, who imprisons journalists and takes away business property, who shares it with his former KGB agents, who invades and seizes Crimea and eastern Ukraine — this is an astonishing state of affairs.” He apparently doesn’t approve of Trump’s statements.
When: As of this posting, 20 hours ago

Of course, that’s from a conservative news source, and they’re renowned for their non-bias and accuracy, so maybe that’s not who you’re complaining about.

Let’s try The Hill. Not really sure if they’re considered a liberal news source, but they list a sponsored link about the Latino Economy, and their video link is from MSNBC, so let’s say they lean a little bit liberal.

Retired general: Trump’s Putin remarks may be ‘most anti-American statement’ ever by president

Who: Donald Trump, Barry McCaffrey
What: McCaffrey objects to Trump’s defense of Vladimir Putin
Where: An interview with Bill O’Reilly of FOX News
Why: “I’m actually incredulous that the president would make a statement like that,” McCaffrey told MSNBC. “One could argue that’s the most anti-American statement ever made by the president of the United States. To confuse American values with Putin, who is running a criminal oligarchy.” Not exactly the same quote as the above, but the gist is the same.
When: Yesterday

So, what problem do you have again?

(Bold underline added)

@Knowed_Out

“Thanks for playing” was overused 20 years ago. If you’re going to copy and paste, at least use something more recent.

So, you ever going to respond to post 96? For some reason you keep resorting to bitter behavior whenever we ask you to clarify your remarks.

Hahahaha. “Overused?” Now you’re pretending to be the word police? :rolleyes: You must be a Democrat.

Meanwhile, back at post 96, you asked what problem I have with the media. I’ve repeatedly explained that the main stream news media needs to do a much, much better job of reporting the news than they have been doing. Capiche?

[Ravenman]

I’m not going to quote myself fourteen times to make this point, so let me make it simple to understand:

We all understand that you rate the media on how much they tell you things that you agree with, whether or not they are true. We’re saying that’s a bad metric to use.

[VinylTurnip]

@doorhinge

for

(post shortened)
*
<standing ovation & cheers>*

[Shodan]

@doorhinge

(The question then is whether or not the target of the haters should care if some hater sitting in their mom’s basement, surrounded by empty pizza boxes, and straining to look thru their spittle covered PC screen, is to be taken seriously.

That’s not spittle.

Regards,
Shodan

[elucidator]

Well, I guess if anybody would know…

[Steve_MB]

The question at this point is whether anybody can make up stuff that’s worse than the reality.

[Knowed_Out]

@doorhinge

Meanwhile, back at post 96, you asked what problem I have with the media. I’ve repeatedly explained that the main stream news media needs to do a much, much better job of reporting the news than they have been doing. Capiche?

My goodness, thinking must be really painful for you.

Yes, we got the message. You repeated it instead of answering any challenges to your reasoning. You really didn’t need to go through all that trouble of hunting for your old posts, quoting them, and using underlines. Is that why it took you 5 days to respond?

Post 96 gave you evidence that 2 news media sites provided the Who, What, Where, When and Why you demanded. You only read the last sentence and decided you’d rather bold and underline it than read the words above it. You even mentioned that you bolded and underlined. Look, I can do it too. Aren’t you impressed? (See, I used italics too.)

I responded to your assertions with actual facts. It doesn’t fit your world view, which won’t be any more correct no matter how many times you repeat it and text format it.

[SteveG1]

@Shodan

That’s not spittle.

Regards,
Shodan

That’s just nasty!

[VinylTurnip]

It was the taste test that got me.

[doorhinge]

@Shodan

That’s not spittle.

Regards,
Shodan

Ewwww. Hilarious, but ewwww.

[doorhinge]

@Knowed_Out

…Yes, we got the message. You repeated it instead of answering any challenges to your reasoning. You really didn’t need to go through all that trouble of hunting for your old posts, quoting them, and using underlines. Is that why it took you 5 days to respond?

Post 96 gave you evidence that 2 news media sites provided the Who, What, Where, When and Why you demanded. You only read the last sentence and decided you’d rather bold and underline it than read the words above it. You even mentioned that you bolded and underlined. Look, I can do it too. Aren’t you impressed? (See, I used italics too.)

I responded to your assertions with actual facts. It doesn’t fit your world view, which won’t be any more correct no matter how many times you repeat it and text format it.

“We”? “We got the message”? Who is this “we” you’re referring to? You and the pizza delivery guy?

You provided two (2) incidents where the news media outlets actually managed to provide the information that they should be providing for ALL of the news stories they produce. Two out of how many?

I’ve repeatedly explained that the main stream news media needs to do a much, much better job of reporting the news than they have been doing. Is that the message you understand? I hope so, because that’s the message I’m sending. You seem to be under the impression that the news media’s managing to get two (2) news stories written correctly somehow makes up for the times when, during their rush to publish/judgment, they publish stories that later need correction. I prefer accuracy over bragging rights of being first to report.