For guys who call themselves journalists, Wejo, Rojo, and Gault are way too credulous when it comes to their pet runners and coaches. Can you imagine a journalist from the NYT or Telegraph using this guy as an expert source, and then giving him an additional platform to spout off? LRC is its own worst enemy
This post was edited 12 seconds after it was posted.
Reminder that rojo has yet to provide proof of the money he allegedly "raised" from the profits of burritogate shirts, nor has he explained why he would even be sending money to her in the first place.
The Schumacher bootlicking is at its peak at this point, it's unreal.
OK even if you sort of have a point at a certain point you make no sense. They are married to white women who probably aren’t as petite or young as Shelby? WTF does that have to do with it?
For guys who call themselves journalists, Wejo, Rojo, and Gault are way too credulous when it comes to their pet runners and coaches. Can you imagine a journalist from the NYT or Telegraph using this guy as an expert source, and then giving him an additional platform to spout off? LRC is its own worst enemy
It happens all the time, but the difference is they they have a separate editorial section so that there is a clear separation between news and opinion. The WSJ for example has some of the best journalists and news stories, and then editorials that seem as if the writers don’t read their own news desk. On a running website, things are more blended together.
You are the idiot here. I did follow your train of thought but I wanted clarification that you are indeed as palpably stupid as you are. So if we believe you then incels like you spend a lot of time defending women you cannot have sex with? So this would include pretty much all women. Wow…just wow.
(1) I'm not an incel. Incel stands for "involuntary celibate" and are known to hate women. I have sex A LOT and I LOVE women, so I'm not an incel.
OK even if you sort of have a point at a certain point you make no sense. They are married to white women who probably aren’t as petite or young as Shelby? WTF does that have to do with it?
I have made my point--which makes sense--multiple times already.
(1) The Brojos are runners from a young age, which means as they hit puberty and became attracted to females, they were surrounded by what is their preferred sexual partner--white american women runners, who are petite due to their running.
(2) Over the years, the Brojos have not defended other men and women who popped positive. These men and women have not been: white or american.
(3) Then Shelby pops positive. She fits the description of their preferred sexual partners. The Brojos are married, but due to their age and the relative age of their spouses, their spouses are better life partners but no nearly as good sexual partners as Shelby would be.
(4) They aren't able to have sex with Shelby, so they instead defend her
OK even if you sort of have a point at a certain point you make no sense. They are married to white women who probably aren’t as petite or young as Shelby? WTF does that have to do with it?
I have made my point--which makes sense--multiple times already.
(1) The Brojos are runners from a young age, which means as they hit puberty and became attracted to females, they were surrounded by what is their preferred sexual partner--white american women runners, who are petite due to their running.
(2) Over the years, the Brojos have not defended other men and women who popped positive. These men and women have not been: white or american.
(3) Then Shelby pops positive. She fits the description of their preferred sexual partners. The Brojos are married, but due to their age and the relative age of their spouses, their spouses are better life partners but no nearly as good sexual partners as Shelby would be.
(4) They aren't able to have sex with Shelby, so they instead defend her
apologies for the typos. I'd go back and edit, but this POS website (no offense, just an observation) doesn't let me
You obviously don't really read stories from national news sources. The NYT has written multiple stories using an uneducated child ad their expert source regarding global warming.
I created a thread about your article yesterday but you deleted it. I guess I was being too critical for your taste.
I will leave my point here again. No one cares what Twoggle thinks. The only reason Twoggle is of any interest to anyone is because we want to know who he IS. It seemed like a Shelby/Nike plant from the start. So to me your article was useless.
For guys who call themselves journalists, Wejo, Rojo, and Gault are way too credulous when it comes to their pet runners and coaches. Can you imagine a journalist from the NYT or Telegraph using this guy as an expert source, and then giving him an additional platform to spout off? LRC is its own worst enemy
The same NYT that didn't even mention Caster S was XY? NYT used to be at the top tier of journalism integrity, but those days have passed for all media outlets.
Shelby take nadrolone. Gets caught. Brahsjohs defend vehemently, in spite of overwhelming evidence. They even paid a scientist to review the case and the scientist agreed with the WADA findings. Brahsjohs dig in, have Galt write up his expose'. Twoggle takes over a number of threads, under Brahsjohs nose and they approve. robjo misspells and garbles syntax with impunity. weljo plays both sides. Twoggle takes over more threads.
Two years later Twoggle 'wins" a Brahsjohs contest. Gets interviewed and more time on the platform.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.