Jump to content
Rusty Syringes

[** Official President Joe Biden Thread **]

Recommended Posts

Apparently AOC is getting her followers to vomplain to twitter about the hashtag #aocsmollett or something.  So Twitter will react and take down anything against her.  She cant handle the truth.

Got to love big tech.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care about the Clownzo stuff, but I think if I was going to beat a nickname for Trump into the ground I would go after his orange skin or fat.  Stuff like Cheeto-in-Chief, Agent Orange, Kim Jung Orange, Cockwork Orange, Fat Nixon, etc.

Since you like Clownzo so much, maybe you go Clownworks Orange or would that make more sense describing his administration?

For Biden, all I see is Fire Marshall Bill every time I look at him, so I would just call him Fire Marshall Biden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nobody said:

I don't really care about the Clownzo stuff, but I think if I was going to beat a nickname for Trump into the ground I would go after his orange skin or fat.  Stuff like Cheeto-in-Chief, Agent Orange, Kim Jung Orange, Cockwork Orange, Fat Nixon, etc.

Since you like Clownzo so much, maybe you go Clownworks Orange or would that make more sense describing his administration?

For Biden, all I see is Fire Marshall Bill every time I look at him, so I would just call him Fire Marshall Biden.

This is why Rusty was run out of the news indstry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, nobody said:

I don't really care about the Clownzo stuff, but I think if I was going to beat a nickname for Trump into the ground I would go after his orange skin or fat.  Stuff like Cheeto-in-Chief, Agent Orange, Kim Jung Orange, Cockwork Orange, Fat Nixon, etc.

Since you like Clownzo so much, maybe you go Clownworks Orange or would that make more sense describing his administration?

For Biden, all I see is Fire Marshall Bill every time I look at him, so I would just call him Fire Marshall Biden.

I like Dirtbag Don. Because he’s a Dirtbag. :thumbsup: 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

This is why Rusty was run out of the news indstry.

You're right. It had nothing to do with the newspaper industry going down the sh!tter. It just keeps getting more successfuller and successfuller, you shrimpy little spitwad of a humanoid.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

You're right. It had nothing to do with the newspaper industry going down the sh!tter. It just keeps getting more successfuller and successfuller, you shrimpy little spitwad of a humanoid.

 

Well by the way you keep posting NYT articles, I would say they are doing just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

Oh they laid off 68 people last year, the horror!  And yet they keep making more money.

You don't really understand how business works, do you?  Poor lil guy.  Maybe go ask your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The New York Times is a publicly traded company.  Judging by their quarterly earnings, they seem to be doing just fine.  Probably because they're replacing the Rusty's of the world with computers since they write better articles anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Non- essential. 

If you mean this thread, we are in total agreement for a change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

If you mean this thread, we are in total agreement for a change. 

I agree.  It's not going well for Slow Joe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

🦖🦖🦖🦖🦖🦖

🦖CLOWNZILLA!🦖

🦖🦖🦖🦖🦖🦖

You can all look forward to this in every biden thread now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Oh they laid off 68 people last year, the horror!  And yet they keep making more money.

You don't really understand how business works, do you?  Poor lil guy.  Maybe go ask your wife.

They've laid off a hell of a lot more than that, but it's funny how on one hand you call it a rag and on the other hold it up as a shiny example of newspaper success.

You don't know sh!t about the newspaper industry, so just stay in your cubicle and push around pencils all day, strawberry shortcake. It'll be less stressful for you and reduce the chances of an outbreak of pizza face, which is more common in middle-aged women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

They've laid off a hell of a lot more than that, but it's funny how on one hand you call it a rag and on the other hold it up as a shiny example of newspaper success.

You don't know sh!t about the newspaper industry, so just stay in your cubicle and push around pencils all day, strawberry shortcake. It'll be less stressful for you and reduce the chances of an outbreak of pizza face, which is more common in middle-aged women.

Weren't you the one that told us how the newspaper industry was amazing when we all tried to tell you it was dying 10 years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

He’s right about the blatant fraid in the election. Too bad he went too far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nobody said:

Weren't you the one that told us how the newspaper industry was amazing when we all tried to tell you it was dying 10 years ago?

Newspaper profits peaked in 2005, when it still seemed like the future was bright thanks to the online presence.

But online revenues wound up being pennies on the dollar of what was expected, because anyone could start a website and throw ads on it. Car dealerships. Hospitals. Furniture stores. You name it.

Newspapers in the 1970s had huge staffs and ridiculous profit margins, and owners kept operating under that mindset as ad revenues and circulation began to dry up.

The cloud really began to build around 2007. I remember the Buttmont editor coming back from a Hearst meeting in New York, and he was a different person - dark, cynical and downright depressed. The philosophy became doing more with less. First, there were the cuts of open newsroom positions. Then the consolidation of press operations with Houston, cutting a bunch of pressroom jobs.

I was working 70 hours a week and doing the jobs of what three or four editors in the past had shared.

With ad revenues declining, the thought was to raise subscription prices. Circulation revenues in the past had been about enough to cover operating costs.

Newspapers that didn't just give away their content online in the early days of the Internet were better positioned down the road to not be so affected.

I fled that place as the walls began closing in. What followed were mass layoffs, with people living in fear of seeing the Houston Chronicle human resources truck pull up and boxes awaiting people's desk belongings. I'm glad I never had to see that.

I fled to to a family owned daily in 2008. At the time, it seemed to be thriving. The benefits were great, the 401K had a nice match, newsroom positions got filled, and the paper seemed to be above the floodwaters drowning other newspapers.

But then the owner-publisher made some dumb and ultimately fatal decisions. The website was terribly mismanaged, and one dumb idea after another went down in flames.

Even amid the downsizing, there was hope and a sense of purpose, right up into my final year in the business in 2014. What I wasn't privy to was just how bad things had gotten.

The place was so badly managed that owner-publisher had to sell the paper for a fraction of what it was worth just a few years earlier. 

Greed ultimately proved to be the industry's undoing. 

Instead of placing its bets on its real moneymaker - the content - newspapers shed experience in favor of young, cheaper labor, and the content has suffered greatly.

Now, a newsroom that once had almost 50 employees now employs a handful.

While they've suffered mass layoffs, the likes of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other major publications continue to produce essential content people are willing to pay to see online. Major metropolitan newspapers still have the staff power to produce content that the television news stations can't. But the mid-sized newspapers can't slug it out with the local affiliates like they once could. 

Newspapers remain financially tethered to print, but the clock is running out on that as the older audience dies off, with no one to replace them. 

None of the colleagues I came up with in the business are still in it. They either got laid off or saw the writing on the wall and jumped ship.

I feel bad for the journalists still fighting the good fight but not so much for the companies that employ them.

I had quite a colorful career and regret nothing, but I'm enjoying what I'm doing now more than I ever enjoyed that industry. 

And I make a lot more money and work a lot less, to boot.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rusty Syringes said:

Newspaper profits peaked in 2005, when it still seemed like the future was bright thanks to the online presence.

But online revenues wound up being pennies on the dollar of what was expected, because anyone could start a website and throw ads on it. Car dealerships. Hospitals. Furniture stores. You name it.

Newspapers in the 1970s had huge staffs and ridiculous profit margins, and owners kept operating under that mindset as ad revenues and circulation began to dry up.

The cloud really began to build around 2007. I remember the Buttmont editor coming back from a Hearst meeting in New York, and he was a different person - dark, cynical and downright depressed. The philosophy became doing more with less. First, there were the cuts of open newsroom positions. Then the consolidation of press operations with Houston, cutting a bunch of pressroom jobs.

I was working 70 hours a week and doing the jobs of what three or four editors in the past had shared.

With ad revenues declining, the thought was to raise subscription prices. Circulation revenues in the past had been about enough to cover operating costs.

Newspapers that didn't just give away their content online in the early days of the Internet were better positioned down the road to not be so affected.

I fled that place as the walls began closing in. What followed were mass layoffs, with people living in fear of seeing the Houston Chronicle human resources truck pull up and boxes awaiting people's desk belongings. I'm glad I never had to see that.

I fled to to a family owned daily in 2008. At the time, it seemed to be thriving. The benefits were great, the 401K had a nice match, newsroom positions got filled, and the paper seemed to be above the floodwaters drowning other newspapers.

But then the owner-publisher made some dumb and ultimately fatal decisions. The website was terribly mismanaged, and one dumb idea after another went down in flames.

Even amid the downsizing, there was hope and a sense of purpose, right up into my final year in the business in 2014. What I wasn't privy to was just how bad things had gotten.

The place was so badly managed that owner-publisher had to sell the paper for a fraction of what it was worth just a few years earlier. 

Greed ultimately proved to be the industry's undoing. 

Instead of placing its bets on its real moneymaker - the content - newspapers shed experience in favor of young, cheaper labor, and the content has suffered greatly.

Now, a newsroom that once had almost 50 employees now employs a handful.

While they've suffered mass layoffs, the likes of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other major publications continue to produce essential content people are willing to pay to see online. Major metropolitan newspapers still have the staff power to produce content that the television news stations can't. But the mid-sized newspapers can't slug it out with the local affiliates like they once could. 

Newspapers remain financially tethered to print, but the clock is running out on that as the older audience dies off, with no one to replace them. 

None of the colleagues I came up with in the business are still in it. They either got laid off or saw the writing on the wall and jumped ship.

I feel bad for the journalists still fighting the good fight but not so much for the companies that employ them.

I had quite a colorful career and regret nothing, but I'm enjoying what I'm doing now more than I ever enjoyed that industry. 

And I make a lot more money and work a lot less, to boot.

 

 

I'll give a dollar to anyone who actually admits that they read this.

Thing is, a bunch of you would lie just to get the dollar. I can't trust you. :mad: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rusty Syringes: Nice write-up...  Do you think that if maybe journalists would actually just report the news and try not to do it with a bias, that they (and newspapers) might be better off?  You can't even watch/read any news any more without any angle in it...  I miss the days of just reporting the facts and let the viewer decide what they think/not think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, posty said:

@Rusty Syringes: Nice write-up...  Do you think that if maybe journalists would actually just report the news and try not to do it with a bias, that they (and newspapers) might be better off?  You can't even watch/read any news any more without any angle in it...  I miss the days of just reporting the facts and let the viewer decide what they think/not think...

That's not what the people want.  The people say they want that, but ratings for the op-ed shows tell a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

Here's something that might be more on-level with your reading ability.

https://www.amazon.com/Wheres-Spot-Eric-Hill/dp/0399207589

Not reading whatever crap your putting out there now either. You have proven to be a full blown idiot, and any effort on my part to look into what you have to say would be a waste of time. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, posty said:

@Rusty Syringes: Nice write-up...  Do you think that if maybe journalists would actually just report the news and try not to do it with a bias, that they (and newspapers) might be better off?  You can't even watch/read any news any more without any angle in it...  I miss the days of just reporting the facts and let the viewer decide what they think/not think...

I wish it were that way. We always operated under the saying, "If your mother says she loves you, check it out!"

The Associated Press used to be the most unbiased, fact-based entity in the land, but it's a shell of itself, and left-leaning editorializing has crept into its news copy.

Here's an example, which only took me a few seconds to find:

https://apnews.com/article/smartmatic-sues-fox-news-giuliani-2a8d83df2e6d73b750dd85f92f4fd7ef

Quote

The 285-page complaint filed Thursday in New York state court by Florida-based Smartmatic USA is one of the largest libel suits ever undertaken. On Jan. 25, a rival election-technology company — Dominion Voting Systems, which was also ensnared in Trump’s baseless effort to overturn the election — sued Guiliani and Powell for $1.3 billion.

The insertion of that word is editorializing and doesn't belong there. Just say "Trump's effort to overturn the election ... "

Local newspapers are pitiful when it comes to balanced reporting and running down facts.

A few years ago, Walgreens put out a news release declaring my community as the state's flu capital.

They based the story on Tamiflu sales, not actual numbers that could be obtained by the local health department.

The newspaper here just ran down the field with the press release. What the story didn't take into account was the rampant prescribing of Tamiflu. If one person in a family got the flu, everyone in the family was prescribed Tamiflu. The two hospitals here prescribed Tamiflu to its employees as a precautionary measure.

The newspaper basically got duped into running a front-page Walgreens advertisement disguised as a news story. The only news story here is that we were the state's Tamiflu prescription capital.

They didn't check with any of the other pharmacies, including ones the local grocery company runs. They didn't talk to the health department or CDC.

But the worst omission was that the reporter didn't bother to talk to anyone who had recently had, or was currently suffering from, the focking flu.

The story should have looked something like this:

BUTTMONT - The achy feeling took hold of defense attorney Mike Fuhner as he gave closing arguments Wednesday in a murder trial in the 345th District Court.

By the time Fuhner, 47, a lawyer with Lock, Stock & Barrel, arrived home later that day, the fever has started, and by bedtime he suspected he had the flu.

"I had all the classic symptoms," Fuhner said. "The misery came on hard and fast."

The next day, a doctor diagnosed  Fuhner with the flu and prescribed Tamiflu to him as well as his wife, Old Maid, formerly the ninth wife of failed journalist Rusty Syringes, and their two twin sons, Gutter and Nobody, 8.

A Walgreens news release Thursday proclaimed Buttmont as the state's flu capital, but Pecker County health officials said the Walgreens numbers only reflect Tamiflu prescriptions, not actual flu numbers.

And that's how you write a focking news story, b!tches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nobody said:

That's not what the people want.  The people say they want that, but ratings for the op-ed shows tell a different story.

That's true. Everyone scrambles to tickle their audience's ballz instead of putting out factually based, unbiased news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Utilit99 said:

Not reading whatever crap your putting out there now either. You have proven to be a full blown idiot, and any effort on my part to look into what you have to say would be a waste of time. 

 

But it has big pictures, mostly one-syllable words and super-short sentences!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rusty Syringes said:

But it has big pictures, mostly one-syllable words and super-short sentences!

Even a cat whisperer can understand them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Even a cat whisperer can understand them?

I am a cat whisperer. 

I often get assigned the problem ones as taming projects.

I'd write more about it, but your brain would be unable to process my hauntingly beautiful prose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rusty Syringes said:

I am a cat whisperer. 

I often get assigned the problem ones as taming projects.

I'd write more about it, but your brain would be unable to process my hauntingly beautiful prose.

Here kitty kitty:

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Hand said:

Rusty has to be Newbie. 

I remember Newbie well. He seemed like a nice fellow. Why do y'all hate on him, and where did he go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rusty Syringes said:

I remember Newbie well. He seemed like a nice fellow. Why do y'all hate on him, and where did he go?

Hi Newbie 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rusty Syringes said:

They've laid off a hell of a lot more than that, but it's funny how on one hand you call it a rag and on the other hold it up as a shiny example of newspaper success.

You don't know sh!t about the newspaper industry, so just stay in your cubicle and push around pencils all day, strawberry shortcake. It'll be less stressful for you and reduce the chances of an outbreak of pizza face, which is more common in middle-aged women.

A lot of hate in this post.  I hope it made you feel better about yourself, Rusty.  :( 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×