# OL Obama vs. McCain



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

For those of you that get the magazine Outdoor Life, have you had a chance to read the 'McCain vs. Obama' article?

I've read through Obamas section and am about 1/4 through McCains.
What did you think?

Also, did anyone notice the anti-Obama ads in the magazine? Do you think OL should be printing ads like this in their magazine?

Just so i'm sure, this WAS in OL right? I got F&S too and I don't have the magazines with me...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Do you think OL should be printing ads like this in their magazine?


They are an Outdoor magazine so I would guess they want to appeal to their readers. I know NRA does it all the time. Was the add paid for by someone, or did they put it in of their own prerogative?

I would guess it is in their own self interest. If firearms are threatened hunting will suffer, and if hunting goes down the tubes who will read their magazine?


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

They have as much right to print the ads as any of the libs have to endorse Obama.

People can print what they want, its up to us to sort through the BS and find out what the truth is.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

I posted 3 NRA ads on the "Just for you Ryan " thread

And got no interest or comments :eyeroll:


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

> They have as much right to print the ads as any of the libs have to endorse Obama.


Well, my question is weather they _should_.



> I posted 3 NRA ads on the "Just for you Ryan " thread
> 
> And got no interest or comments


Stick to the topic please.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

yes they should, as a hunting magazine they are alerting their readers of a presidential candidate who is extremely anti gun in every way...it is only right and fair to alert the readership and those who use firearms legally for hunting......some even cling to their Bible as well...we know!


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

Did you read the article 9494?


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

> And got no interest or comments


Oh, it received interest, zog :wink:

Hunt dude, what is your idea of an "anti-Obama" add?

I don't get the magazine so I haven't seen it, but I suspect I have seen the add elsewhere.

I'm wondering if you conside an add that explains his ANTI-GUN stance as being an anti-Obama add.


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

An ad that is against/not for Obama.

I could care less if it's true or not. My question is weather they should 'go there', and get involved with politics...


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

I guess I haven't seen it then. Can you post it?


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

huntingdude16 said:


> An ad that is against/not for Obama.


Damn straight. If they aren't they have no place in the outdoors business.

Unless of course your a liberal, freelance hunter hater, like Tony Dean that really can't say crap if he had a mouthful.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I could care less if it's true or not.


What??????????? I care, I care a lot if it's true or not.

Hey, if you don't mind can I vote for you? 

News papers are supposed to be about news. The run adds for politicians. They are restricted to paying people. You would never know it since they also endorse candidates. Should they be doing that? The news is supposed to be non biased yet they endorse people. Outdoor Life isn't expected to be non biased.

I have thought about building custom coyote howlers. Would I endorse a candidate. You bet, no guns, no hunting, who buys custom coyote howlers? Nobody that's who. It would be in my best interest to do anything within my power to stop Obama.


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

> What??????????? I care, I care a lot if it's true or not.


You need to read the sentence after that one... :lol:

"My question is weather they should 'go there', and get involved with politics..."

My main point/question is weather OL should get involved in politics. It's a hunting magazine. I'd much rather see an advertisement for Benelli, or Jack Links...(don't deny it, you love Messin with Sasquatch.  )



> I guess I haven't seen it then. Can you post it?


I'll try and remember to bring it home tomarrow.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Huntingdude16 maybe you can grasp what people are saying by me changing things a bit.

I order a NASCAR mag for a friend of mine who loves this style of racing. Now if NObama or McCain where proposing to support legislation that would limit or eliminate racing do you think it is in their best interest to point this out to people?

My bet is you are unaware of the real threat hunting and gun ownership have faced and still face, or you are a supporter of NObama and are upset that a publication you like is not on the same page with you. Either way there is nothing wrong with them being political or allowing political ads to be run in their magazine.

And if you are still unclear, the answer is YES! they should be involved in this political game. They may be preaching to the choir for the most part, but if they educate someone who has no real clue in regards to the issues of hunting and gun ownership of these two candidates. Then their involvement even biased has provided a piece of education that voter may not have had!


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

huntingdude16 said:


> > What??????????? I care, I care a lot if it's true or not.
> 
> 
> You need to read the sentence after that one... :lol:
> ...


OL or F&S are not non-profit organizations..they can do whatever the wish when it comes to the magazine they publish, and politics

And yes I think they "should go there". There are a million political issues which the readers of these magazines should be aware of.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> You need to read the sentence after that one...


  The way it was written that's what it meant, but I was hoping I was wrong. I guessed you meant "regardless of whether it is true or not my point is should they be doing it". You never know these days, and I just wanted to be clear on what you were getting at. Glad you do care. I was 99% sure, but had to ask.

The media is terribly slanted, other news outlets are slanted, entertainment is slanted, thank goodness someone like Outdoor Life is informing it's readers (all of which I would guess are gun owners) of the reality of the situation.


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

> My bet is you are unaware of the real threat hunting and gun ownership have faced and still face, or you are a supporter of NObama and are upset that a publication you like is not on the same page with you. Either way there is nothing wrong with them being political or allowing political ads to be run in their magazine.


Neither. I posted this topic in a neutral manor and for a simple question to be discussed. :wink:

As Plainsman put it...
"regardless of whether it is true or not my point is should they be doing it"



> The way it was written that's what it meant, but I was hoping I was wrong. I guessed you meant "regardless of whether it is true or not my point is should they be doing it". You never know these days, and I just wanted to be clear on what you were getting at. Glad you do care. I was 99% sure, but had to ask.


Not a problem. :wink:


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

Mike,
Why would you think they shouldn't be taking a politcal stand in their magazine?

By questioning the political stance they have taken, you automatically make yourself look like an Obama supporter who is unhappy with what you read.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

The article is in Field and Stream. And the ad appears to have been paid for by the National Shooting Sports Foundation. It says:
"Some Change We Can Do Without!
Barack Obama Has Supported:
-A total ban on handguns
-A ban on the sale or transfer of all semi-auto firearms
-A ban on right-to-carry permits
-A ban on firearms kept in the home
-And much, much more
The supreme court second amendment decision is not the end of the battle, It's just the beginning.
Don't risk your rights!
Register to vote today!
www.nssf.org/register
(there is a picture of obama on bottom left corner of the ad)"

Do I think it was wrong for them to print the ad? Not at all. Like stated, it is a publication with many different companies advertising in it. When I sit down to watch The Office tomorrow, I am sure there will be a zillion political commercials on during the show. It's the same thing.


----------



## jgat (Oct 27, 2006)

Here is a link to the article on their web site:

http://www.fieldandstream.com/article/H ... Candidates


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

dblkluk said:


> Mike,
> Why would you think they shouldn't be taking a politcal stand in their magazine? .


Well, I probably shouldnt say they shouldnt, but I think they could do it in a bit more of a 'formal' way. For instance, writing out an article that we can tell is based of facts.
It says a total ban on handguns; ok, show the legislation that proves it. I think we all could benefit from such an article because not only can we say he is anti-gun, we can readily prove it.

I think the readers would get more out of that than a one page ad.

I think too much is said these days, claimed as fact without any evidence, and believed.



> By questioning the political stance they have taken, you automatically make yourself look like an Obama supporter who is unhappy with what you read.


I don't mean to question their stance. I would ask the same if there was a McCain ad.


----------

