Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Rome2000
So are you saying gq didn't think there would be any controversy from their decision to run the article?

Don't they have editors that decide what to publish and what to cut?

If Robertson is guilty of anything then gq is even more so.

11 posted on 12/20/2013 3:02:34 PM PST by A Cyrenian (Don't worry about stuffing the bus or filling the fridge. Try filling the Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: A Cyrenian

...and just what is it that gq is supposed to be guilty of?


14 posted on 12/20/2013 3:06:51 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: A Cyrenian

They’re supposed to censor what he said so faggots aren’t offended?

Not their job.

This is a fairly well written piece, again, not a hit job.

If the faggots can’t handle it, they need to get back in the closet.


18 posted on 12/20/2013 3:13:02 PM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: A Cyrenian

Then you haven’t read the actual article. It was actually decent. It was well-written and fair and had no “gotcha” intent. It was interesting for what it was.

A few lines were taken from it (that had nothing wrong with them to begin with) for fake homo outrage. GQ did nothing wrong. They actually got it right for publishing a decent article and keeping Phil’s words in complete context.

Homo-loving A&E is trying to stir up controversy where none exists.


31 posted on 12/20/2013 3:54:47 PM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson