1 posted on
01/25/2005 11:23:10 AM PST by
paltz
To: paltz
Amazing how public pressure and a little media exposure helps on these libs act the right way.
2 posted on
01/25/2005 11:24:26 AM PST by
seppel
To: paltz
The magazine first claimed the ad's "spiritual message" might turn off its pot-smoking audience.
LOL! Newsmax is funny.
3 posted on
01/25/2005 11:25:23 AM PST by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: paltz
After a big "whoops, we really botched the PR on that," the ad comes in...
4 posted on
01/25/2005 11:25:26 AM PST by
July 4th
(A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
To: paltz
Most magazines are happy for anyone willing to advertise in their nearing-extinction medium.
5 posted on
01/25/2005 11:25:56 AM PST by
Tall_Texan
(Let's REALLY Split The Country! (http://righteverytime3.blogspot.com))
To: paltz
rolled stone
![](http://www.kjvuser.com/bible_sched/reading08_files/tomb8-2.jpg)
6 posted on
01/25/2005 11:26:14 AM PST by
evets
(God bless president George W. Bush)
To: paltz
Which Bible?
A good one like the KJV or one of them "fluffy translations", that wouldn't DARE call God a "he" for fear of hurting the feelings of "womyn"?
As an aside, talk about CORPORATE talk here: "We have addressed the internal miscommunications that led to the previous misstatement of company policy and apologize for any confusion it may have caused," Lisa Dallos, spokeswoman for Wenner Media, Rolling Stone's parent company, told USA Today.
Most corporate executives main talent: Saying something without really "saying anything" at all.
To: paltz
I don't know about pot smoking crowd. The only place I see it is at the beauty parlor. Of course, I don't hang out in bars. LOL
9 posted on
01/25/2005 11:30:57 AM PST by
Mercat
(Forgiveness is part of Your plan.)
To: paltz
"We have addressed the internal miscommunications that led to the previous misstatement of company policy and apologize for any confusion it may have caused," Lisa Dallos, spokeswoman for Wenner Media, Rolling Stone's parent company, told USA Today.
LOL... I love these people. They can't just say "we did what we want and feel like, didn't expect people to be so mad, but since they are, we take it back" No.. its an "error" in communication. A policy that was mistaken or misunderstood. Nothing to see here... stop looking now. Go back to what you were doing... It was an honest mistake... honestly.
To: paltz
Public pressure or not, I'll give Rolling Stone magazine credit for apologizing and recinding it's ban.
11 posted on
01/25/2005 11:33:11 AM PST by
Obadiah
To: paltz
"We have addressed the internal miscommunications that led to the previous misstatement of company policy and apologize for any confusion it may have caused..."
![](http://home.xnet.com/~scott880/irwincorey/front2.jpg)
![](http://www.pickeringcreek.com/newcig.gif)
|
|
Good thing we got that cleared up. |
16 posted on
01/25/2005 11:40:36 AM PST by
Fintan
(A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. - Groucho Marx)
To: NYer
21 posted on
01/25/2005 11:53:34 AM PST by
paltz
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson