St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist who defended NRA quits after suspension.

Stacy Washington, a writer for this newspaper, was suspended for writing a rebuttal on "Guns and the Media" disputing an anti-NRA article.

The article claimed that “more Americans die from guns than from ISIS, the Second Amendment advocacy group is the greater danger.” Ms Washington replied,” When has a member of the NRA ever decapitated, set on fire, tossed from a rooftop or otherwise terrorized another American? The linkage is not only rife with improper context; it is false on its face.” She went on to criticize that there is a lack of conservatives in the American newsrooms. “This failure to represent the opposing, especially conservative, view is an increasingly apparent deficit in the news reporting apparatus in our country.” Washington has made appearances as a co-host and commentator on “Cam & Company” on NRA TV and also an NRA documentary in August 2016. However, she has never received any money from the NRA.
Tod Robberson, the Post-Dispatch’s editorial page editor, states, “Her active promotional activities and professional association with the National Rifle Association represented an unacceptable conflict of interest in her most recent column, which resulted in our suspension of her work.”

So according to his way of thinking, a Christian cannot comment on any other religion, if you’re a vegan, you can’t comment on the beef industry, or if you drive a car, you cannot comment on buses, train or planes.
Wow, this is what’s happening to our MSM (Marxist State Media). No surprise

originally posted by: Violater1
Stacy Washington, a writer for this newspaper, was suspended for writing a rebuttal on "Guns and the Media" disputing an anti-NRA article.


Tod Robberson, the Post-Dispatch’s editorial page editor, states, “Her active promotional activities and professional association with the National Rifle Association represented an unacceptable conflict of interest in her most recent column, which resulted in our suspension of her work.”

What really amazing is that this guy Tod apparently is contented that this explanation is good and solid to justify the suspension.

Here is a link to her Twitter page;
twitter.com...
I hope it worked.

If Colbert can say the snip he did.

I don't see why Stacy couldn't say what she did.

Interesting how that works.

At the speed of cognitive dissonance.

originally posted by: Violater1
Tod Robberson, the Post-Dispatch’s editorial page editor, states, “Her active promotional activities and professional association with the National Rifle Association represented an unacceptable conflict of interest in her most recent column, which resulted in our suspension of her work.”

If she were registered Democrat and colluded with the Hillary Campaign while writing columns for the paper that would have been a-okay eh???

a reply to: Violater1

Tod Robberson, the Post-Dispatch’s editorial page editor, states, “Her active promotional activities and professional association with the National Rifle Association represented an unacceptable conflict of interest in her most recent column, which resulted in our suspension of her work.” 

so the paper also suspended anyone else with ANY political ties?
a crappy lawyer could win this case

I wonder if she has any legal recourse in suing the paper. I mean, she did quit, which might make it harder. But getting suspended for a counter editorial is pretty damned fascist.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Tod Robberson, the Post-Dispatch’s editorial page editor, states, “Her active promotional activities and professional association with the National Rifle Association represented an unacceptable conflict of interest in her most recent column, which resulted in our suspension of her work.” 

so the paper also suspended anyone else with ANY political ties?
a crappy lawyer could win this case

Hell...I am just a dummy without a law degree....I could win this case.

a reply to: Violater1

She dared to voice her opinion.

I say she got off lightly.


(sarc)

Lmao
Just told my ultra-liberal (read confused as all get out) girlfriend about this and she seems to think it's fine. She also thought it was some crazy conspiracy when the story about Juan Thompson broke

Anyway, an employer can do as they please with regards to employment and suspensions. They also, like everyone else, reap what they sow.

a reply to: essentialtremors

as long as the treatment is equal

a reply to: Violater1

The remarkable fatuousness of the reasoning leads me to believe that Michael Savage is correct, liberalism is a mental disorder. An OP ED is, by definition, a statement of an opinion. Can one only write OP EDs in favor of opinions one does not hold? What an ultra maroon.

a reply to: shooterbrody

That's the rub, as long as the person has a liberal view of America, she'll defend their actions to the death.

Anyone else? Fair game to her.

To be fair she gets all of her thoughts and talking points from her closed circuit group of ultra-liberals on FB. So who knows what she REALLY thinks.

I am trying to figure out if Stacy was suspended because her bosses were:

Racist,sexist,misogynist or just hoplophobes.

I wonder.

originally posted by: essentialtremors
Lmao
Just told my ultra-liberal (read confused as all get out) girlfriend about this and she seems to think it's fine. She also thought it was some crazy conspiracy when the story about Juan Thompson broke

Anyway, an employer can do as they please with regards to employment and suspensions. They also, like everyone else, reap what they sow.

Any Liberal would think it is fine because this woman was defending the NRA.
As another member said above...this was a OP-ED story...a rebuttal to another story.
Liberals will shoot anyone down with a different opinion.
I hope she sues the piss out of them, any Civil Rights lawyer would jump at this case.

a reply to: neo96

None of the above.

Liberals can't be any of those by default.

They're the peoples champions and anyone else is an idiot that shouldn't voice their opinion.

Just another example of how leftists don't believe in free speech.

They are more the "authoritarian douche-wad" types.

originally posted by: essentialtremors
a reply to: neo96

None of the above.

Liberals can't be any of those by default.

They're the peoples champions and anyone else is an idiot that shouldn't voice their opinion.

I hope your Leftist girlfriend didn't order you to write that post and you were just being sarcastic.

a reply to: RazorV66

I'll leave that to speculation.