Davin News Server

On Thu, 2 Oct 2025 09:25:07 -0400,  -hh says...  

> > No... it's not ONLY about the mRNA vaccine.
> 
> Your own subject line:

Is it the title of the article and/or study?

Nope.
 
> "Re: For The Faggots Who Believed The mRNA Vaccine Was Safe And 
> Effective - Just One of The MANY Articles On this Topic"
> 
> I see (emphasis added): "..THE mRNA Vaccine..", not 'Vaccines'.

There is no "emphasis", stupid. mRNA is mRNA, not Mrna.

All I "asked", was for those who believed the mRNA vaccine was safe. Incidences and rates of Autism HAVE risen since the mRNA 
vaccine was introduced, so fuck off.

I never said the article was ABOUT mRNA vaccines only.

If you wouldn't have creamed your panties and salivated at the chance to prove me wrong, you would have CAUGHT it that the article 
I posted was NOT about the mRNA vaccine specifically.

I've never seen you whine and cry as much over your fella [giggle] fellas here write subject titles that are a little click-baity. 

If I would have titles the subject "Autism Rates Reach Unprecedented Highs: 1 in 12 Boys at Age 4 in California, 1 in 31 Nationally
Feed"... who the fuck would CARE?

OK... now YOUR assignment is to tell me that "I admit that the subject line was "wrong" and "click-bait."

Not really, because the mRNA vaccine IS included in the study.

If yu wanna whine about it, you have my permission, but NONE of what I posted was "wrong".

> > Show us, from the text below, that the study and article was ONLY about mRNA vaccines.

> That's your job as the OP and you chose the subject as mRNA's.

There aren't any fucking "jobs" here for ANY of us to do, you fucking moron.

There's NO protocol regarding what I can name a subject, either.

If you wanna whine and cry about what people name things, start in your own "back yard" [giggle], with your fella "backyarders" 
here who name their subjects with LITTLE regard to the subject matter.

Do you need examples of said subjects that have as much to do with what's inside, as you do with heterosexuality?

> > Do that, and I'll retract and beg news servers across the globe to 
> > delete every article I ever wrote.
 
> LOL, you'll never do any such thing:  you'll keep on doing what you 
> always do: deleting points and moving the goalposts to never have to 
> publicly admit that you're wrong.

Then, do as I said, and find out, chicken shit.

===============================================================================

"Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition

All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.

"Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has been driven effectively insane due to their dislike 
of Donald Trump, to the point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."

Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into 
three distinct phases or stages:

"In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, 
as if 140 characters were all it took to change the world."

"The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting 
solely of hyperbole."

"As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from reality."

The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk opposition from liberals to anything and everything 
Trump does. If Trump announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would suggest he was up to something 
nefarious, according to the logic of TDS. There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be received 
positively by TDSers.

The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early 2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was a 
punch line for late-night comics and nothing more.

Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first coined by the late conservative columnist Charles 
Krauthammer back in 2003. The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in 
reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay - the very existence of George W. Bush."