Ha. Sounds to me like they realized they were about to go out of business and this is just desperate backtracking. Sorry. Too late. If any of what the editor says about his commitment to the second amendment is true, Metcalf's column never would have made it into print. They're done.
I agree with the above. It's very disingenuous to pass that article through editing and publish it then only fire the author. Management should have never let that missive see the light of day
If you check up on the editor's statement about this, you'll see that he's apologizing AND resigning his position.
So the editor is falling on his sword, too.
David Fortier indicated that the incoming editor is very solidly unwavering in his politics. As in, he is unlikely in the extreme to approve anything like this.
Current editor screwed up in letting this go to print. Author is fired, editor resigning by way of apology. Sounds pretty good to me.
They "Did it to start a conversation"? Guess they didn't like what the "conversation" was about. STUPID!! That is gonna cost them for years and years.---Ray
I'll bet Mr. Bequette will hereafter carefully read and consider columns before he approves their publication. We will see if his article about firing Metcalf is published in the next issue. It likely will be.
Disingenuous is the word indeed. Oh, I'm so sorry I just grabbed your balls, please forgive me! People that get caught stealing chickens from your barn, and that are made to answer for it, will be back later to burn it down, as a way to show their resentment of your catching and bringing them up short. Frank Miller knew he was wrong when convicted and sent to jail by Gary Cooper, but that never registered with him in the slightest. He just wanted to pay the marshal back for catching him and interrupting his bullshit. Guns and Ammo will be back, and around the freedom communities neck, with a vengeance. So will CTD. Soon as Obongo and co. turn up the heat, watch them dance to a new tune.
I'd rather have a friend who made a mistake and owned up to it... than a burned corpse tied to a stake.
You guys never made a mistake, then?
Now, there are LOTS of people writing gun articles who advocate CC "permits" and so forth... lots of them want to incarcerate anyone who ever expressed a fit of depression... and so forth. I don't agree with any of that myself.
In the end, we each have our own criteria and "purity test." If we all shoot each other over our differences... who's left?
Let's hold people responsible for what they say and do, most definitely, but burning at the stake just doesn't seem very rational - especially if they admit mistakes and continue the dialog.
Don't buy the magazine, if that makes you feel better. It's just a shame to mount a head hunt over something like this.
So how came the NRA doesn't experience the same backlash over the same damn stance? Background checks? Training requirements? Permission slips based on arbitrary and capricious qualifications? Poll taxes? Bans on automatics? The NRA supports all kinds of gun control, so why does it get a pass?
Her Wally, says the beaver, what would happen if Patriots stood up to the weenie wagon like they just did Guns and Ammo?
I, for one, think this is about as good of a response as you could ask for. And fast. Yes, it would have been better to have not printed it, but it did afford us the opportunity to show our commitment. And people all over have taken notice.
I guess I need to stick to my word and re-subscribe, as I told them I would if he were let go publicly before the year's end.
12 comments:
Ha. Sounds to me like they realized they were about to go out of business and this is just desperate backtracking. Sorry. Too late. If any of what the editor says about his commitment to the second amendment is true, Metcalf's column never would have made it into print. They're done.
Wow, that was quick. Too bad we don't have the same reaction when we flex our mussels against left wing politicians and other assorted scum.
I agree with the above. It's very disingenuous to pass that article through editing and publish it then only fire the author. Management should have never let that missive see the light of day
@justsomeguy,
If you check up on the editor's statement about this, you'll see that he's apologizing AND resigning his position.
So the editor is falling on his sword, too.
David Fortier indicated that the incoming editor is very solidly unwavering in his politics. As in, he is unlikely in the extreme to approve anything like this.
Current editor screwed up in letting this go to print.
Author is fired, editor resigning by way of apology.
Sounds pretty good to me.
They "Did it to start a conversation"? Guess they didn't like what the "conversation" was about. STUPID!! That is gonna cost them for years and years.---Ray
I'll bet Mr. Bequette will hereafter carefully read and consider columns before he approves their publication. We will see if his article about firing Metcalf is published in the next issue. It likely will be.
- Old Greybeard
In case you all missed it, Bequette is leaving as well, and ahead of schedule.
Disingenuous is the word indeed. Oh, I'm so sorry I just grabbed your balls, please forgive me! People that get caught stealing chickens from your barn, and that are made to answer for it, will be back later to burn it down, as a way to show their resentment of your catching and bringing them up short. Frank Miller knew he was wrong when convicted and sent to jail by Gary Cooper, but that never registered with him in the slightest. He just wanted to pay the marshal back for catching him and interrupting his bullshit. Guns and Ammo will be back, and around the freedom communities neck, with a vengeance. So will CTD. Soon as Obongo and co. turn up the heat, watch them dance to a new tune.
I'd rather have a friend who made a mistake and owned up to it... than a burned corpse tied to a stake.
You guys never made a mistake, then?
Now, there are LOTS of people writing gun articles who advocate CC "permits" and so forth... lots of them want to incarcerate anyone who ever expressed a fit of depression... and so forth. I don't agree with any of that myself.
In the end, we each have our own criteria and "purity test." If we all shoot each other over our differences... who's left?
Let's hold people responsible for what they say and do, most definitely, but burning at the stake just doesn't seem very rational - especially if they admit mistakes and continue the dialog.
Don't buy the magazine, if that makes you feel better. It's just a shame to mount a head hunt over something like this.
So how came the NRA doesn't experience the same backlash over the same damn stance?
Background checks? Training requirements? Permission slips based on arbitrary and capricious qualifications? Poll taxes? Bans on automatics? The NRA supports all kinds of gun control, so why does it get a pass?
Her Wally, says the beaver, what would happen if Patriots stood up to the weenie wagon like they just did Guns and Ammo?
The occassional demonstration of what we will do to our own vacilators should be a graphic lesson to the gun grabbers!
Probably too dumb to see it though ...
III
I, for one, think this is about as good of a response as you could ask for. And fast. Yes, it would have been better to have not printed it, but it did afford us the opportunity to show our commitment. And people all over have taken notice.
I guess I need to stick to my word and re-subscribe, as I told them I would if he were let go publicly before the year's end.
Post a Comment