Petey, You Can’t Be Serious

Well, the Brady’s aren’t the only people who read our blogs. The NRA picked up on “Pistol” Petey Hamm’s comment to Uncle. While I also believe that Mr. Hamm* was joking, I do stand ready to help embarrass any member of the Brady Campaign staff, or board members.

* That name always makes me think of the great movie quote “Give me Hamm on 5, hold the Mayo.”   We anxiously await Peter’s return to finish the line from the title “I am serious, and don’t call me Petey, or I’ll shoot you”

14 thoughts on “Petey, You Can’t Be Serious”

  1. I was thinking about “Hamm radios”. And “Hamm-fisted”. And “Hamm hocks”.

  2. I’m a little peeved that they didn’t link to the article directly. I mean, you and I know for a fact that he said that, but if the NRA isn’t going to link back here, how can anyone verify?

    Not being an NRA member (and therefor not receiving my monthly wheelbarrow of cash!), I don’t know who I should contact, but you definitely should have them correct that.

  3. When I got that email, I kinda thought to myself “hmmm, where’s the link?” Unlike Robb, my wheelbarrow just showed up at the door, so I’m not gonna complain about the NRA.

  4. What exactly is Petey going to shoot Uncle WITH?

    “Pow-pow”, says Petey, as he points his little finger-gun.

  5. Not pissed, peeved. The Brady’s use that tactic – they say “somebody said or did X” but won’t provide proof.

    Besides, it’s just tacky to not do something as simple as a link.

  6. You know, whenever I hear “Petey”, my thoughts immediately turn to schlock…

    That said, they could have at least done the courtesy of linking…

  7. I agree that the NRA should at least have shown the common courtesy of providing a link–especially to you, Sebastian, as you do a good job of sticking up for the NRA, while others of us (myself, for example) tend to dwell on what we perceive as the organization’s shortcomings.

  8. I’m guessing, just a guess here because I haven’t talked to anyone, but the reason they didn’t link is because that gets sent out in formats that links don’t work. In short, they may not have the technology. There are ways to deal with that, but you need something that can convert a link into something that works for a non HTML medium.

  9. There was a link to Fox news in there, and even if they didn’t want to embed HTML into the email, they could have typed the whole thing out.

    Seriously, for a group of people who can dole out cash by the wheelbarrow…

  10. The reason I’m going easy on them is they probably don’t really understand etiquette in the blogging world, so they probably aren’t even aware of their faux pas. The medium is a new thing for them, and not something they understand well, but they are trying.

    I probably should make sure they understand that for future references. Truth be told, it might even be my blog name that could be a problem, because these alerts go out to a pretty conservative crowd, some of whom might be put off by the title of the blog.

    Either way, it’s something I should explain, just so this doesn’t happen to another blogger, who might not be as forgiving.

  11. You could have stopped with “they don’t understand ettiquette”.

    They almost never recognize any work or effort by others, even if those others did all or most of the lifting. Example: the lawsuit over gun confiscation in New Orleans, reading their memos on the subject one wouldn’t realize there was another plaintiff who filed first and was in it all the way.

  12. The reason I’m going easy on them is they probably don’t really understand etiquette in the blogging world, so they probably aren’t even aware of their faux pas.

    I e-mailed someone there today. It appears this was, in fact, the case. They are aware of that issue now, so hopefully next time they highlight a blog in an alert, we’ll get a link.

Comments are closed.