[Glenn.]

Isn’t 5:03 a bit early to be on the sauce?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Not another 'E' grade in your comprehension paper....

My age? Older but not significantly so...someone said they read thats she's really at least 40 but I don't believe that's true.

Well at least I taught you one word... comprehension.

Your use is wildly inaccurate, however. Maybe direct your "research" towards something a little more substantial than celebrity gossip and your vocabulary will grow.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Only an idiot would type in someone's name so they could count how many bad articles come up about that person.

The wonderful thing about a search function is that it brings up the total for you.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

There’s this thing called a search function. I typed in her name and 194 pages of articles were the result.

So how do you know hundreds of them were negative? You can't know that unless you read them all - my word.... -

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by jet

So how do you know hundreds of them were negative? You can't know that unless you read them all - my word.... -

It’s the Daily Mail...


EDIT: page 1 of 194 features 14 sensationalised negative stories

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

It’s the Daily Mail...


EDIT: page 1 of 194 features 14 sensationalised negative stories

Went to have a look - I typed in Daily Mail Meghan Markle and I didn’t see anything that sensational in the headlines of the articles???? Not anything like as bad as I thought you were all talking about in referring to the gossip rags, the DM in particular that some seem obsessed with.

Just the usual stuff, some positive, some negative, pretty tame, that probably all the papers were carrying I presume….can you provide examples of these sensationalised headlines?

[thesheriff443]

It’s funny how the same members turn themselves inside out attacking every negative post while claiming those member’s are obsessed, when in fact it’s those member themselves that can’t accept an opinion on someone they don’t know.

And they go through the same act of so called calling someone out and then congratulating one another like they achieved something.

And when they get really into it they start throwing the word hate around.

[Marsh.]

"Went to have a look" = Opened the Daily Mail app you get notifications from.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

It’s funny how the same members turn themselves inside out attacking every negative post while claiming those member’s are obsessed, when in fact it’s those member themselves that can’t accept an opinion on someone they don’t know.

And they go through the same act of so called calling someone out and then congratulating one another like they achieved something.

And when they get really into it they start throwing the word hate around.

People can have their opinion, and I'm entitled to mine. That's how it works.

What's funnier is you only ever coming in these threads to comment on what other members are doing.

Practice what you preach.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

It’s funny how the same members turn themselves inside out attacking every negative post while claiming those member’s are obsessed, when in fact it’s those member themselves that can’t accept an opinion on someone they don’t know.

And they go through the same act of so called calling someone out and then congratulating one another like they achieved something.

And when they get really into it they start throwing the word hate around.

Isn’t this exactly what you’ve just done though? In future perhaps it’s best to stay on topic instead of obsessing over other members

[jet]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

It’s funny how the same members turn themselves inside out attacking every negative post while claiming those member’s are obsessed, when in fact it’s those member themselves that can’t accept an opinion on someone they don’t know.

And they go through the same act of so called calling someone out and then congratulating one another like they achieved something.

And when they get really into it they start throwing the word hate around.

Very true. Instead of stating their own considered opinion on the subject matter, they attack the poster. It shows really that they don't have a counter argument to attempt to refute what is said, so they just lash out with a lot of nonsense to cover up.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Very true. Instead of stating their own considered opinion on the subject matter, they attack the poster. It shows really that they don't have a counter argument to attempt to refute what is said, so they just lash out with a lot of nonsense to cover up.

Pointing out tabloids are sensational tosh beneath anyone of any level of intelligence is nonsense?

Stating the press and public backlash against Meghan Markle... grossly outweighs anything she has actually said or done is not a counter argument?

Half of your posts to me in this thread about my age aren't personal?

Stick to click baiting articles.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

It’s funny how the same members turn themselves inside out attacking every negative post while claiming those member’s are obsessed, when in fact it’s those member themselves that can’t accept an opinion on someone they don’t know.

And they go through the same act of so called calling someone out and then congratulating one another like they achieved something.

And when they get really into it they start throwing the word hate around.

Speaking for myself I don't really care about Meghan as a person one way or the other as I don't personally know her or know that much about her away from the very basics.

For me I don't like seeing the Media witchunt people unnecessarily in any field, I've felt the same in the past about people like Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, and even from more Showbiz stuff like what happened to Caroline Flack, and the "bullying" accusations that the Media helped TXF use against Misha B.

For me even if I don't like the person very much (like Corbyn for example) I'll still defend the person if the Media is attacking them beyond what they've said or done, and that will include Meghan in this particular case as her biggest crime is that she's an ego maniac apparently, by the Royal Family standards that's quite tame.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Pointing out tabloids are sensational tosh beneath anyone of any level of intelligence is nonsense?

Stating the press and public backlash against Meghan Markle... grossly outweighs anything she has actually said or done is not a counter argument?

Half of your posts to me in this thread about my age aren't personal?

Stick to click baiting articles.

Baity one liners aren't a sufficient counter argument, no. Maybe on some obnoxious online comments forum but not on Serious Debates.

I asked you your age politely and asked if you didn't mind...

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Baity one liners aren't a sufficient counter argument, no. Maybe on some obnoxious online comments forum but not on Serious Debates.

I asked you your age politely and asked if you didn't mind...

I could ask your BMI and IQ politely, doesn't make it relevant to the thread.

Much.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Speaking for myself I don't really care about Meghan as a person one way or the other as I don't personally know her or know that much about her away from the very basics.

For me I don't like seeing the Media witchunt people unnecessarily in any field, I've felt the same in the past about people like Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, and even from more Showbiz stuff like what happened to Caroline Flack, and the "bullying" accusations that the Media helped TXF use against Misha B.

For me even if I don't like the person very much (like Corbyn for example) I'll still defend the person if the Media is attacking them beyond what they've said or done, and that will include Meghan in this particular case as her biggest crime is that she's an ego maniac apparently, by the Royal Family standards that's quite tame.

Spot on Mock.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Speaking for myself I don't really care about Meghan as a person one way or the other as I don't personally know her or know that much about her away from the very basics.

For me I don't like seeing the Media witchunt people unnecessarily in any field, I've felt the same in the past about people like Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, and even from more Showbiz stuff like what happened to Caroline Flack, and the "bullying" accusations that the Media helped TXF use against Misha B.

For me even if I don't like the person very much (like Corbyn for example) I'll still defend the person if the Media is attacking them beyond what they've said or done, and that will include Meghan in this particular case as her biggest crime is that she's an ego maniac apparently, by the Royal Family standards that's quite tame.

Every word I agree with there Mock.
Excellent post that covers so much of the issue.

Particular in relation to the media.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

"Went to have a look" = Opened the Daily Mail app you get notifications from.

Ermm, no - but there is actually some pretty interesting stuff in that search. Nothing really as hateful and vile at all as you and others insist there is- I'm surprised. Which rags DO you read, where do you see this stuff? Links?

[LukeB]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Speaking for myself I don't really care about Meghan as a person one way or the other as I don't personally know her or know that much about her away from the very basics.

For me I don't like seeing the Media witchunt people unnecessarily in any field, I've felt the same in the past about people like Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, and even from more Showbiz stuff like what happened to Caroline Flack, and the "bullying" accusations that the Media helped TXF use against Misha B.

For me even if I don't like the person very much (like Corbyn for example) I'll still defend the person if the Media is attacking them beyond what they've said or done, and that will include Meghan in this particular case as her biggest crime is that she's an ego maniac apparently, by the Royal Family standards that's quite tame.

Great post Mock!

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I could ask your BMI and IQ politely, doesn't make it relevant to the thread.

Much.

Baity one liners aren't relevant either. Its Serious DEBATES.
I asked your age because of your baity one liners which often derail threads. I have often ignored you in the past but it didn't stop you needling away at me in a childish fashion.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Baity one liners aren't relevant either. Its Serious DEBATES.
I asked your age because of your baity one liners which often derail threads. I have often ignored you in the past but it didn't stop you needling away at me in a childish fashion.

Keep trying to build that moral high ground that just crumbles beneath you with every post you make.

Your hypocrisy is crystal clear.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Keep trying to build that moral high ground that just crumbles beneath you with every post you make.

Your hypocrisy is crystal clear.

Okey doke.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Ermm, no - but there is actually some pretty interesting stuff in that search. Nothing really as hateful and vile at all as you and others insist there is- I'm surprised. Which rags DO you read, where do you see this stuff? Links?

What stuff?

The only time I've mentioned tabloids is when YOU post them to back up your ludicrous statements.

[Marsh.]

Go back to "ignoring every post" I make if your skin is so thin you can't bear anyone questioning or responding to your posts.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Isn’t 5:03 a bit early to be on the sauce?

Some of us work sundays.