|
|
September 7, 2006Dems again overplay hand and prove projectionThey plan on using the power of the federal government to demand political changes to a program before it airs, a dangerous precedent and a completely different problem than what existed before. Presumably, this would become yet another fruit of their takeover of the House should they succeed in the midterms. It makes an excellent argument for extended Republican control. - Ed Morrissey The headline says Democrats urge ABC to withdraw 9/11 movie. Except urge should read “threaten to take ABC’s license…” This is very, very troubling. This is what is called “overplaying your hand,” and the Democrats do it all the time. Not content with letter writing, registering complaints and the edits ABC has already agreed to, not content with Clinton’s own work to protest a made-for-tv docudrama…they threaten to pull a broadcast license if the show is not canned. Incredible. But others say it very well without my input: If the Democrats do not like what ABC wants to broadcast, they have every right to protest it — and in this case, they had a point. They can organize protests and boycotts, letter-writing campaigns and so on. What they cannot do is to threaten a broadcast license for political differences, regardless of the situation. It violates the spirit of free speech and makes the Democrats look like Big Brother. Many people have pointed out that conservatives protested the factual deficiencies in “The Reagans” three years ago… The Democrats also appear to have completely changed their position as well. This is what [The Democratic National Committee] said about conservative criticism of CBS three years ago, and without a Republican threat against their broadcast license: [emphasis mine - admin] “But the decision makes it very easy to imagine a future where representatives for the Bush administration have the power to disapprove of any content that touches politics, policy, or history — including news programs.” Concludes Ed: It’s certainly easy to imagine it now — the Democrats have delivered it. Welcome to the Enforced Perspective Party. It’s a staggeringly dumb political mistake… See, when I read what the Democrats said three years ago, predicting the GOP would go after broadcast licenses, and then see what they’re doing now, you know what I see? CLASSIC, TEXTBOOK PROJECTION. Three years ago they fretted about what conservatives might do because it was -they have now proved - exactly what they would do, if they’d had the chance. And never forget…these are the folks who gave standing ovations to Michael Moore’s Farenheit 9/11, which was sold as fact, not “docudrama” and which was anything but factual. Stephen Spruiell: Who in the press will stick up for ABC’s right to air this miniseries without having its broadcast license threatened? Good question…what was that saying about, “first they came for these folks, and no one stood up to them, then they came for those folks…” Blue Crab Boulevard: I am absolutely stunned at this. I think this may be the biggest miscalculation I have seen this election season. I mean this one is positively biblical.[...] Do they have any idea what they look like to the average American? They look not like defenders of the truth, they look exactly, precisely, like they are trying to hide something. This is an absolutely stunningly stupid move. AJ Strata:”…while calls for boycotts, etc are one person’s free speech colliding with another, the calls of censorship have been basically over the top. Until now that is. In an emotional and angry response to a TV Movie the Senate Dems are trying to repeal the First Amendment and destroy our Right to Free Speech by a real true act of censorship…” I’ve visited a few lefty blogs and they’re loving it. As I’ve said many times, they are not really liberals. Classical liberals would never love this, could never love this. Brrrrrrrr….I feel Tim Robbin’s “chill wind” a-blowin’ But it’s coming from the left…the far, far left. Rush Limbaugh: “…the Clintonoids all upset that they didn’t get advance copies of The Path to 9/11. Albright didn’t get one. Sandy Burglar didn’t get one. Richard Clarke didn’t get one. So what? When do they ever? Did George W. Bush get a copy? Did Condoleezza Rice get a copy, in advance?” It’s a fair question. Related: Can the Dems get serious, soon? http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/09/07/dems-again-overplay-hand-and-prove-projection/trackback/ 17 Responses to “Dems again overplay hand and prove projection” |
September 7th, 2006 at 11:04 pm
Letter to Senator Stabenow
When we’re in school, we’re told to send a letter to our Senator or Representative if we have some opinion about the government. We all know that the most likely response is a form letter, sent out by a staffer,…
September 7th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
Freedom of the Press
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Gove…
September 8th, 2006 at 3:37 am
A Pox On Everybody
Jonah Goldberg writes:My basic view is, a pox on everybody. The Democratic Party embraced Michael Moore’s movie at the highest levels. Daschle hugged Moore at the premiere. Carter invited him to sit with him at the convention. Etc Etc. Are…
September 8th, 2006 at 3:40 am
Conservatives Should Hate Disney’s Path to 911 Too
When I heard that Disney was making The Path to 9/11, I thought it was too soon to be making a cartoon about September 11.
September 8th, 2006 at 9:53 am
I said this elsewhere, but I’ll repeat myself:
Any attempt to screw with ABC would be the biggest gift Karl Rove ever got from the dems.
Imagine the debate, in a GOP controlled House, where dems are accused of limiting free expression- and chastised for being selective in their outrage.
Not even the dems are that stupid- and that’s saying something.
September 8th, 2006 at 10:42 am
It’s not about ‘factual errors’
Democrats’ and Clinton-buttkissers’ herculean efforts over the past several days to demonize ABC’s upcoming The Path to 9/11 miniseries are ostensibly about ‘factual errors’ in what ABC has clearly labeled a docu-drama (i…
September 8th, 2006 at 10:54 am
Chill Winds, indeed! The Phony McCarthy Era of Evil was the Leftists prelude to their own special brand of Western Socialist lock-step thought. Now they are showing what they really think about Freedom of Speech, which is to say, not much.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:23 pm
[...] Just the facts, ma’am. “It turned out not all the facts were correct.” Fact meets fiction meets hysteria. Time to blast off. Everyone gets a little exercized. All of this free speech in protest is getting in the way of free speech. [...]
September 8th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
Liberal Hypocrisy Exposed Yet Again
Bill Clinton and other members of his administration demanded ABC alter their upcoming show “The Path To 9/11″ specifically portions that show Clinton’s administration in a very bad light. Funny, they cry out against conservative objections over…
September 8th, 2006 at 6:16 pm
So let me get this straight, Anchoress…
Your argument is that it’s okay for ABC to air lies about the Clinton administration, because the media has in the past aired lies about Republicans?
It would be nice if we would all stop telling lies about one another. Our commitment to the truth should have nothing to do with party affiliation, and it saddens me to see you advocating for the telling of lies about Democrats.
September 8th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
Nate, that’s not my argument at all. My argument is that this movie is a DOCUDRAMA, not a DOCUMENTARY. A Documentary, such as F9/11, is supposed to be factual. A docuDRAMA is a DRAMATIZATION. It doesn’t have to be factual. Composite characters are situations are not uncommon in a drama - they have no place in a documentary. I hope before being ashamed of me you’ll try to repeat my argument back to me accurately.
And btw, the movie sounds like stiff…and the chances are I wouldn’t be watching it anyway…if the tv’s on around here, it’s on baseball. But it’s the principle of the thing. Protest is one thing, threatening to pull a license is something else.
‘
As far as “telling lies about each other,” of course I would love nothing better to see each party behave better…but again, a dramatization is not about “lies” and “truth” - it’s about what the writer wants to put out there. People can hate it; they don’t have to like it, they can object to it, they can write letters…but the line must be drawn at silencing a writer’s vision, no matter how “deplorable” it might be…and the world used to know that. Oliver Stone wrote JFK. Was it “factual”? Probably not. Was it “lies”? Probably not. It was a writer’s idea. That is all this film is, too, and what the Democrats are doing is chilling.
‘
Now, you have it straight from my mouth.
September 9th, 2006 at 10:24 am
Another Contrived Clinton Controversy
All of the contrived hysteria in the last two days regarding the ABC made for television movie, The Path to 9-11 has its generations in the political philosophy of Bill Clinton. The highly orchestrated response of the Clinton spin machine wafted ove…
September 9th, 2006 at 11:23 am
Who say’s it’s lies is only comming from the Liberals in the first place.
1. Did Sandy Burglar steal documents from the National Archive or not? Answer is Yes.
2. He did destroy secret documents so for Nate or anyone else to say that it’s lies is doing nothing more than using the Liberal talking points.
3. Also George Bush and some of his administration is also being critisized so for the Left to think that it’s only ok for the Conservative party to be critisized is just blatent blasphamy.
4. The Left thinks that it’s only for them to have freedom of speech and not for the Right shows a steep amount of hypocracy.
5. AS to the Anchoress, I have no trouble viewing this Documentary like it is and I think that it is fair for both sides to be critisized and if people like Nate who only sees things from his side of the isle as being a lie is completely disingenuous. I have lived a long time and I do know for a fact that the Lies do come mostly from the left, I do remember the Lefts scandalous voting scandals from Bill Daily the Mayor of Chicago Illinois back in the early 60’s and I also was a Liberal first much like Michael Medved and Dennis Prager so I have a certain perspective on this than do most of your commentors.
September 9th, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Well, I agree that there should have been no threats to pull their license. I’ve protested such heavy-handed antics by the Bush administration and I’m not going to condone them for the Clinton administration.
Still, I think I should point out that you were favoring this docudrama and bashing the Clintons before the threat to pull ABC’s license. While I know that a docudrama doesn’t have to be 100% accurate, I think it’s irresponsible for a network to air a docudrama that portrays one party as being responsible for 9/11 with events that never even happened, right after the President from the other party comes on TV to tell the voting public to vote Republican or die (which is, we all know, exactly what President Bush is going to do because that’s what he’s been doing all week).
It’s a pretty good 1, 2 punch, don’t you think? First, the President comes on TV and all but says that if the voting public doesn’t vote Republican, there will be another terrorist attack. Then, ABC airs a docudrama in which made-up events make it look as if the Clinton administration — a Democratic administration — was responsible for 9/11. Now, Anchoress, what do you think the average Joe Voter is going to do after seeing that combination? You or I would find out the truth; but you have to acknowledge that there will be thousands, perhaps even millions, of people who won’t bother.
What ABC is doing is telling lies to influence an election. Why they’re doing it, I don’t know. But anything that uses made-up events to make it look as if Democrats caused 9/11 just two months before a major midterm election in which Democrats are poised to take back at least one house of Congress, if not both, can’t be construed as anything other than electioneering. I’m not saying I want Democrats to take either house of Congress back — as you know, I don’t — but I don’t want them to lose because of lies that the media has told, anymore than I would want Republicans to lose because of lies that the media has told. Our democracy should be better than this.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Nate,
‘
Did I object to Clinton carrying on before the Dems made their threat? Yes. I still maintain he would have been better off NOT drawing attention to the thing.
‘
That said, the Maddy Albright thing does seem egregious. I don’t know if I would agree that the Sandy Berger one is, though. As I wrote elsewhere, what is dramatized there was written about by Lt. Col. Robert Patterson in his book Dereliction of Duty…so who knows if it is true or not (my husband, the most non-political person in the world, is disturbed that Berger doesn’t say “that never happened,” only that “that’s not in the 9/11 commission report). The video over at Flopping Aces suggests that the Clinton admin DID have Osama in its sites and wonders why we didn’t act.
‘
Francis - my neighbor - is it morally right to create fiction about living people? Good question. When you see a glowing docudrama starring Martin Sheen as Bobby Kennedy (whom, I must say, I loved) do you mind that? Is it always morally wrong to create fiction about living historical people, or only morally wrong to do so if the story is not complimentary? I think that’s a fair question.
‘
One last comment to Nate - ABC is not known as a conservative outlet - in fact, quite the opposite, and I think the idea that ABC is somehow conniving with the WH to screw around with the elections is incredibly unlikely.
September 9th, 2006 at 8:52 pm
[...] Others on this topic: AJ Strata always has it right! Michelle Malkin, Powerline, The Anchoress. Seth at Hard Astarboard is wonderful. You have to see Stuck on Stupid! Stop the ACLU is great! [...]
September 21st, 2006 at 9:12 am
Yonder Comes the Meme du Jour
No, Variety, it’s not very much like “The Reagans”. Not very much at all.
The Path to 9/11″ is looking a lot like “The Reagans, Part II.”
Bill Clinton loyalists are demanding wholesale changes to the upcoming minise…