Posted on 10/28/2008 5:25:58 AM PDT by Perdogg
To our readers:
In the weeks since the November issue of Men’s Health hit mailboxes and newsstands, there has been an extraordinary outpouring of mail concerning our choice for the cover: Barack Obama. Some of you were excited to see a man you admired, some were grateful to learn about the presidential candidate from an MH perspective, and some of you felt betrayed by what you saw as a politically charged choice for the cover of your generally a-political magazine. Our selection of Senator Obama for the cover was based on two things: 1) he’s a man in the public eye, and worthy of a profile in Men’s Health, and 2) he’s a man squarely in our readers’ demographic who embodies many of the health, fitness, and success practices this magazine espouses. So, in placing him on our cover, we were endorsing a lifestyle, and a record of achievement, not necessarily a candidate. That choice, ultimately, is every voter’s, alone. But as the profile clearly states, you don’t have to vote for Barack Obama the politician to learn something from Barack Obama the man. If you don’t agree with that choice, we invite you to enjoy the other 206 pages in the magazine, and take the usual measure of “useful stuff” from them. If we’ve caused you grief, our apologies. That’s not our usual approach to reader service. The December issue, we pledge, will be quite Obama-free.
Best regards, The Editors of Men’s Health
I subscribed to Men's Health a few years ago. They had some great guy recipes and good workout stuff, and some good fashion stuff for men, including guys in their forties and fifties, like me. A new editor came in and the magazine suddenly became full of "how to score with the kind of sluts I turned down in high school" articles.
I let my subscription lapse and haven't opened the pages in probably five years.
I also agree with other posters that most of these men's magazines now are primarily catalogs for the latest overpriced GPS/Army Knife/Radio/wrist watch or $250 mountain climbing bicycle shorts, but always containing an undercurrent of supposed hipness with snide side comments about conservatives, as if we're all supposed to be in on the joke.
I have been a subscriber to Men’s Health for over ten years. I immediately canceled my subscription when I received the Obama issue. I’ve received two such emails offering me a free issue.
I want to see the Shamwow guy go toe to toe in a death match with the OxyClean guy!
I disagree with the way their love/sex/romance articles are written, if one is persecuted, menaced where one goes, the clock never runs: I respect women’s rights to have children and that has been properly reciprocated. Criminal acts against a person is against life.
The Shamwow guy would get Munsoned in the first round.
"You know, Munsoned!"
A Metrosexual Mag.
I don’t know what Mad Men is. I don’t watch tv anymore. I read things online, listen to radio, and watch Netflix.
“success practices”... like leeching off the taxpayer?
LOL
It’s a tv show about Madison Avenue in the 60’s. Season 1 is on DVD; Season 2 just ended on Sunday. Might be worth a look-see from Netflix.
It wasn’t an ad, but an email I got from them, BF, stating that in response to their petition the Obama’s said they would adopt a dog after the election. I was severely disappointed that they felt they had to politicize their efforts.
I doubt that the muckety mucks at BF are even from Kanab or UT.
I didn’t see a petition floating around to get the McCain’s to adopt a shelter animal.
There's more at http://edgruberman.wordpress.com/
I promptly tore off the cover and threw it in the fire I had going...burned beautifully.
Thanks for the quote from Atlas Shrugged... There’s another Ayn Rand opinion piece I remember her writing in the summer of 1972, I think for the NY Times editorial page (but I haven’t been able to find it in the archives there). It was written in response to Dem presidential nominee George McGovern’s plan to “tax wealth” (the original “spreading the wealth around” candidate — and that’s why I wanted to find it). Anyway, the money line in that piece was something like “the only relevant question that should be raised on this idea is: ‘By What Right?!’ “
And her whole point was the immorality of government assuming some call on people’s private property (their wealth) and the government’s “right” to take it or to impose a tax on wealth.
If I find it, you can be sure I’ll have it posted here at the FREEP.
PS: Every decade or so, I feel the need to re-read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. I think 2009 may be the year for my latest.
If you write some oddly worded post to someone, I just ask you murderers to pay for your crimes, I don’t stalk and harrass people here. Time I asserted my rights like everyone else. So when do you murderers pay for your crimes with the police?
When does Obama get on the cover of 'Bowling Digest' for the kickass 37 he bowled in PA.?
Did you know the movie is going to be out in 2009?
http://www.atlasthefilm.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.