Gun owners have also been forgiving (and forgetful) of another editorial “leader,” one who abandoned them in their hour of need, one who refused to apologize, and who remains defiant and dismissive of his critics. [More]
Today’s Gun Rights Examiner report asks if reconciliation is possible and notes it doesn’t pay to be an anti-gun gun writer—unless it does.
1 comment:
Good article, David.
Once upon a time, I liked Metcalf. He's an older guy, like me, and interesting to read. But I'm sick to death of the mouthpieces in the industry becoming alleged "Constitutional scholars," and crapping all over the meaning and intent of the document.
Let him be resurrected. But I'll avoid any publication that picks that freaking maroon up. In the mean time, like a number of other publications, I won't buy a G&A for quite some time, if ever. There will have to be a much better apology. One with an amendment. Like donating a substantial part of every subscription to GOA or JPFO, for instance. Then I'll take a look. Words are cheap. Actions matter.
I'm willing to cut Jim Bequette just a tiny bit of slack. It's likely that the editor has a hectic schedule. But rather than checking the English usage and grammar, he should have been thinking, WTF?? Then, he should have sent the piece back to the idiot writer, and told him to send it to Sarah Brady or any of the other anti-rights associations - he was fired if THAT was what he really believed.
I'm tired of our "friends" pissing down our backs and telling us it's raining.
Kinda like "I'm your friend. Trust me. No. Really."
Post a Comment