| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Liberal whining about ABC’s”The Path to 9-11″ makes headlines at the NYT
Bubbinski apologists are still foaming at the mouth over ABC’s “The Path to 9/11” docudrama, and the whining over it has gotten so loud that even the NYT has noticed.
Usually when I see this much liberal handwringing about how ‘unfair’ or ‘inaccurate’ something is, that means whatever it is they’re flipping out over is well worth seeing/reading/hearing. So consider the panic-stricken cries of ‘unfair!’ and ‘inaccurate!’ as a ringing endorsement of “The Path to 9/11″.
The first part airs Sunday 9-10 at 8 pm ET and the conclusion airs Monday 9-11 at 8 pm ET.
Update I: Brian at Iowa Voice asks an excellent question:
Why was a blatantly biased (and untrue) movie made by Michael Moore and released right before the 2004 Presidential election totally OK with libs, but a documentary, being aired on one of the most liberal networks on the air, placing a large share of the blame for 9/11 on Clinton isn’t?
My answer: Because the Bush-hating anti-war left are only interested in their version of the ‘facts’, no matter the issue.
I’m betting that Path to 9-11 will be a lot closer to being accurate than Moore’s crockumentary ever hoped to be.
Update II: Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters blogs extensively on the left’s smear campaign against the docudrama.
Related:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
59 Responses to “Liberal whining about ABC’s”The Path to 9-11″ makes headlines at the NYT”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot something. According to Condi, the problems in Iraq are “birth pains.” And I guess we’re the mothers screaming out, “how could you do this to me?” to our husband, George W. Bush.
By the way, how did the NSA head who saw the greatest intelligence failure of this country’s history get promoted to Secretary of State and in some conservatives’ eyes, become a Presidential contender? Oh, she’s a black woman. She can’t lose!
Tommy. Your statement is irrelevant. Tell me how any number of civilian leaders in the past century were military men. The standard was JUST erected by accusational bombastic liberal types who make political newbies just nod their heads and say, “yeah”. It’s irrelevant otherwise. Trust me, I know how it works, I once was a liberal. A bunch of accusational points that don’t further the discussion with relevant facts but DO appeal to people who aren’t knowledgeable on the issue. You aren’t dealing with a rookie here. When I was a liberal in 1991 the conversion was long and was a deep core belief change with 3 trips to the library PER week for a full year.
There is a strategy for Iraq whether you insist Joseph G. style 100 times that there isn’t. You can rattle off assertions and accusations till you are blue in the face but it doesn’t make you correct. Your charges are baseless. It is IN writing and has been in writing since the start of the Iraq war. Additionally, things HAVE changed as the strategy needed to change to ADAPT to the enemy. And if you insist one more time Joseph G. style that there is no strategy it doesn’t make it true and highlights your mental disease.
BTW. You weren’t talking about the Cole bombers. You were talking about Clinton NOT wanting to hand a war unfairly to Bush. You knew what was in Clinton’s mind #1, and #2 you are asserting that Clinton knew Bush would win the election. Now I guess you are covering your tracks with a December timeline. Remember Bush v. Gore was issued on December 12th. Your track covering even was imperfect because plans like the ones you just raised are drawn up over long periods of time not over night. Smilies is the only way to deal with a mental disease..
BTW, You aren’t challenging yourself very hard. It’s easy to come up with accusations and not debate solutions, ideas or what you think will result in said solutions or ideas. It’s easy to charge, make accusations and monday morning quarterback.
I challenge you to rise above your pattern of accusations that aren’t helpful in the debate about Rumsfeld and/or Bush and think of a new tact. You can do it !!
Perhaps Tommy, you could list the exit strategies for World Wars I & II, Korea, Viet Nam, Spanish/American? Just wondering. I’d be interested in comparing with Iraq/WOT.
Perhaps you could list how the Swifties gained politically, or hoped to. As I recall, the main dude, was a Democrat. How did it help him politically to see Kerry the fraud defeated? Also, how were they debunked? I heard there were some points, but was it Kerry’s hat that tipped the scales? I think their main point, that Kerry wasn’t the great war hero he claimed to be was NOT debunked at all.
BTW, you affiliate yourself with a party because the underlying philosophy more closely matches your own on most points. You seemed to nail the Dems correctly insofar as their lack of real caring for the middle class and poor, but you miss badly regarding the Reps suggesting they don’t care either. You need to study harder.
BTW Tommy,
Though I don’t think you made your arguments very well, you weren’t a turd about it throughout all the opposition, and I for one, appreciate it. You availed yourself well even though you’re wrong. Generally speaking.
Very impressive Tommy. You come to this site and trash people saying that they only belive the facts that they want to believe. You then post constantly believing only one side and not the other.
We never lost a battle in Vietnam. The war was lost at home, much like this one, by people who are more interested in political advancement rather than fighting the war on terror, namely the democrats.
Doesn’t make the Swift Boat people right, now does it?
Just like it doesn’t make the vets that you believe right.
As far as Iraq, I’ll tell you like I tell everybody who thinks they know what is going on there. Until you go there and spend some time there, you don’t know anything about what’s going on there. If you are relying on an obviously anti-Bush and anti-war media, which never steps foot out of the green zone, to report on how the war is going then you are not even getting half the story. Go there yourself and then maybe your opinion of it will have some merit.
Man talk about funny stuff, thanks Tommy. What was the exit strategy in WW2??? How many years was it before our boys came back home after WW2?? I don’t believe that Vietnam was a quagmire, unless you are talking about the leftists here at home that destroyed the desire to win the thing. Never lost a single battle in Vietnam, but the left call it a quagmire. How do you argue with such twisted logic??? We are winning the war on terror, inspite of the helpful hand of the islamofacists sympathizers in this country…i.e. the MSM for 1. The MSM wants you to hear only the bad news, they want to turn this country against the war on terror. Do you for one moment believe that if Al Gore, or John Kerry were President the MSM would be so negative?? To quote Kofi Annan, Hell NO!!! Tommy, what kind of bb brained individual would believe that there is nothing but bad news coming out of Iraq?? You want a challenge, go research some good news in Iraq, you can find it, but not at any of the MSM websites. Wake up Man you are being lied to everyday by the MSM, yet you take what they have to say as gospel. – Lorica
But I can picture his lazy retort. But you believe what you are told by the right wing bloggers/sites…
Lazy, lack of due diligence, mental disease…
He acts like we don’t see both sides of hte information spectrum and make a well informed opinion. Many of us here used to be liberals until we started researching and taking the time and effort to reconcile what could be going on.
Baklava, I’m sorry. Are you supposed to be the be-all, end-all of political discourse? You seem to think so because only you, or maybe it’s just conservatives, are able to formulate a well-informed opinion. I actually was talking about the USS Cole as the reason why a war on terror was crafted, but that’s right, you don’t care what I actually say, but how you can attempt to be clever. I’m done with you. You can’t bring up a point, but try to pretend like I can’t either. It’s sad and weak.
Marshall Art, the fact was, from independent websites like FactCheck.org, that the Swift Boat vets were Republican-funded, and the man Kerry got out of the water, a registered Republican, said that the ads were “launched by people without decency” who are “lying” and “should hang their heads in shame.” I don’t see how it’s any real argument. Was Kerry a good candidate? Hell no. But that doesn’t excuse the lies and outright political grandstanding done by the Swift Boat veterans.
The Repubs don’t care. Some of them might, but both parties as a whole just don’t care about anyone who can’t gave generously to their cause. It’s a fact of nature. I’m surprised you would even go against it.
NC Cop, we lost the war in Vietnam. We lost it because we had no reason to fight it. That’s not a side of belief, that’s the facts. But that damn Truman Doctrine had us all over the place. NC Cop, I could go to Iraq and see things the way I see them and you could go there and see things the way you see them and it won’t change anything. That’s fairly naive, don’t ya think?
Lorica, I went to school near DC and came from a military family. Just because the exit strategy wasn’t taken up doesn’t mean it wasn’t in place. Never lost a single battle in Vietnam? Don’t let history get in your way, I suppose. Just going there was a losing battle. The suicide rates (and I’ve lost someone close to me) are insane. The MSM? Please, the media is lazy. Want a prime example? All the crap happening in the world, but what did the three cable news networks focus on? John Mark Karr. Wow. Some retard who says he killed some kid who really doesn’t even matter. Before that, Natalie Halloway. This is local news that is put on TV because it can be emotional, but ultimately, it doesn’t matter. MSM? Lazyass media. Left and right, they’re both focused on ratings and ratings alone. I hate it when the conservatives focus on the media. It makes really no sense because I’m a liberal and I’m disgusted with the media. If anyone, I should be happy as peach. But as it is, I watch Tucker Carlson cause he’s usually entertaining and Lou Dobbs because he actually talks about real issues facing this country.
I remember the MSM being quit negative toward Clinton. But the fact is, you either believe one way or the other. Either the media is down on Bush because he’s unpopular and ratings indicate people enjoy news on his blundering term _OR_ Bush is unpopular because the media is down on him. I saw this media give him a free pass after 9/11 and when Iraq came up, ignored the growing sentiment in this country and the world against the war so they could be imbeded. LAZY media. Nothing more. Now, they realize that hey, people really don’t like the President, how can we use that to our advantage?
The media is not liberal, it’s not conservative. It’s owned by massive corporations who are looking at the allmighty buck over the allmighty truth. The problem is…too many sources outside the MSM are not neutral, but looking to get their relative sides all hyped up. Either way, you’re screwed.
Well, Tommy, a long post, but remarkably devoid of anything other than your version of reality/facts, no real facts, no deep concepts, just more of the “I’m right because I say so and how can you say otherwise” drivel I see put forth time and time again. You are all too willing to swallow everything the liberal/Dems say, then come back with the stinging retort that “factcheck.org, a non-partisan site” (because you say it is and it’s a .org, hey, that means they have to be honest!) says this and that about the Swift Boat people. You casually dismiss everything they say and take the word of people with a different view as though that actually makes what the Swift Boat guys said untrue. It’s part and parcel of the way the left believes and argues, you have made no points, convinced no one other than yourself, and have basically demonstrated that you are shallow and easily led and don’t know how to really debate. You are guillible, but unfortunately the more insane and idiotic the rant, the more gullible you are.
So, you may think the media are lazy and corporate profit driven (another nice little anti-capitalist rant there), and then try and pass that off as proof that they aren’t biased. Your real problem is that they aren’t as biased as you’d like them to be, your statements above show that your problem with them is that they are not left enough.
I casually stop listening to the Swift Boat vets because they came out during a campaign, not before. Because they are funded by Republicans, not neutral concerned parties. Because other people there have said they lied who don’t benefit from Kerry winning. For the exact opposite reasons you believe in every word they say, I suppose.
My rant wasn’t anti-capitalist, it was the nature of things. But nice try.
I’m not gullible, friend. I just don’t believe the way you do. You made no point. That’s all I have to say. Oh, what you said was idiotic. There, we’re even, aren’t we?
Tommy,
The Swift Boat Vets, the actual people that were in Vietnam, that knew they would be attacked for coming out and telling the truth, really had nothing to gain politically.
My guess, the motivation was thier firm belief that John Kerry went to Vietnam, and left with way more credit than he deserved. And the fact that he came back to the United States, hooked up with his old friend Ted Kennedy, and made a speech before congress accusing all american service men as war criminals.
I have many dem friends in my state that would not vote for John Kerry for these reasons.
Tommy,
I want some more debate on John Kerry. I am leading you into a trap. Tell me that Ted Kennedy and John Kerry never met each other before the 1971 event, as Ted Kennedy clearly states in a video clip from that event.
We lost it because we had no reason to fight it. That’s not a side of belief, that’s the facts.
Oh, I see. It’s the facts because YOU say it is. How impressive.
I could go to Iraq and see things the way I see them and you could go there and see things the way you see them and it won’t change anything. That’s fairly naive, don’t ya think?
Yeah, I guess traveling to a country before making a judgment on it is a silly idea. Let me guess? You read alot of newspapers and watch alot of news programs so you REALLY know how it is over there. That’s pretty pathetic.
I remember the MSM being quit negative toward Clinton.
The media is not liberal, it’s not conservative.
Now who’s being naive? Either that or you were born after Clinton left office.
It seems that you label all your beliefs as facts, while trashing others who discuss their beliefs. Your points are general and vague and out of all the posts you have made, I still have no idea what you believe in.
Tommy you can’t name a battle we lost in Vietnam, but it was a quagmire and we lost the war due to suicide rates??? I won’t disagree with you, we shouldn’t have been there in the 1st place, and I blame Truman for that but for other reasons. Truman should of never given Vietnam back to the French, it should of stayed a free country, and France should of just taken it in the shins. It is not I who usually needs a history lesson, but keep trying.
I also won’t disagree with you about the media being lazy, but since they are catering to leftists they can easily get away with it.
The rest of your reply to me is the same silly blah blah blah that comes from most leftists. I did notice that you completely ignored my challenge to you to do alittle research for some good news in Iraq. I expected as much, but hey it is too much fun just posting without knowing. Why don’t you go hang out at the Corps of Engineer website for Iraq, ever been there, yeah I doubt that too.
Lastly NC Cop was in Iraq, and he is way to much of a real man to blow his trumpet so I will do it for him. He don’t need YOU telling him what he thinks about Iraq. Here again if you would of done alittle research you would of found pictures, On this very website, showing NC with some of our good buddies and allies in Iraq. I suppose I should not expect too much from you, after all it is all about blaming someone else for your own laziness. – Lorica
Battles Lost in Vietnam…Battle at the Hamlet of Ap Bac, Siego of Khe Sanh, Fall of Saigon are the big ones.
The media is liberal is just this little catchphrase people like to throw out. Like the world is flat or the universe centers around Earth, it doesn’t actually pass the test of logic, but it’s convienent for everyone involved to say. I’ve never seen this liberal media. Maybe it was when the media employed the likes of Pat Bucahan that it suddenly became liberal. Or Tucker Carlson getting his own show. Yeah, that was highly liberal. Please, the media is after one thing and one thing only. Ratings. The only possible “left-wing media” excuse I can give credit to is that studies have shown thhat liberals tend to be more educated as a whole than conservatives as a whole and therefore, smart people are needed in the media. If you dispute the level of education charge, see the study that saw that people who watch the Daily Show are much more educated than people who watch the O’Reilly Factor. Do notice I didn’t say “smarter,” but “more educated.” Whether or not that leads to more intelligent people is what they do with the education.
Ignored your challenge? You can always find good news. The media was all over the elections, for one. We aren’t winning the war on terror because we think we can throw a big bad military at it and it will solve itself. It doesn’t work that. Maybe you feel safer, but I imagine that’s because the guy you trust is in office. Objectively, we aren’t safer.
NC Cop may have been in Iraq. That’s wonderful. I know several people who have been there. I have been around the military my entire life. And the stories I keep hearing are sprinkled with good stories, but mostly, “I don’t know what we’re even doing there anymore.” That’s interesting. I’m not there and I share the same belief.
It’s not lazy to not agree with you, Lorica. It’s actually incredibly easy.
“NC Cop may have been in Iraq”
There’s no “may have” about it. He was in Iraq.
Too bad he couldn’t train that batillian of troops that refused to go to Baghdad.
Interesting. Conservatives and republicans watch Farenheit 911. Then they remark about how bias and distorted it is. Thats the end of it. Liberals will be screaming and crying about The Path To 911 for years to come. Of course with their hands covering their ears, calling it all lies while absolutly refusing to ever watch it. Acting like spoiled selfish little kids. As an independant its sad that Liberals leave me no choice but to side with Republicans even when I disagree with them. I can’t wait to watch this.
- The Republicans know the Lefts achilles heel, the WOT, and they’re exploiting it full force. The cry baby Dembulbs are reacting just like the immiture children they really are. Of course the more they wail and stomp their feet, the more they bring attention to it. All I can say to Roves pre-election mechanisations is: More, Faster please.
- Bang
I disagree with you Bang.
It’s not the Republicans mostly (except this latest set of speeches given by Bush), it is natural events in the news.
1) Lebanon throwing 1,000’s of missiles at Israel
2) Liquids on planes plot and arrests
3) ABC’s 9/11 film
4) Iran president speeches
5) Iraq progressing with transition of control of military
On and on. Reality is the problem for Democrat leadership. Gotta like the bold move by Brad Pitt !
- Bak – Of course theres a multitude of reasons that are deflating the Dem agenda on a daily basis. I was focusing on The Rep’s/Roves current efforts on the aniversery of 9/11. It’s interesting to watch some of the Liberal bloggers wailing on endlessly at the termerity of Bush to play politics at this key point in time. I find that hillarious. The Left, of all groups, upset that someone on the other side is playing politics during the runup to an election. The very idea! This from the gaggle of conspiracy/Bush hating nut cases no less. Apparently irony and hypocracy do not exit in the absolutist world of Liberal fantasizers.
- Bang
- “… do not exist” in that last line – PIMF
- Bang
Tommy the fall of Saigon happened after we pulled our troops out of Vietnam. The Marines were there only to get embassy staff to safety. Thanks to people who are now held up as heros by the left we decided to leave. Vietnam was quite win-able.
Siege of Khe Sahn ended with us winning it, goof.
From PBS:
April 8, 1968
U.S. forces in Operation Pegasus finally retake Route 9, ending the siege of Khe Sanh. A 77 day battle, Khe Sanh had been the biggest single battle of the Vietnam War to that point. The official assessment of the North Vietnamese Army dead is just over 1,600 killed, with two divisions all but annihilated. But thousands more were probably killed by American bombing.
From PBS again:
Battle of Hamlet Ap Bac:
January 2, 1963
At the hamlet of Ap Bac, the Vietcong 514th Battalion and local guerrilla forces ambush the South Vietnamese Army’s 7th division. For the first time, the Vietcong stand their ground against American machinery and South Vietnamese soldiers. Almost 400 South Vietnamese are killed or wounded. Three American advisors are slain.
This happened when we only had advisors in Vietnam. COME ON MAN, quit grasping at straws.
We aren’t winning the war on terror because we think we can throw a big bad military at it and it will solve itself. It doesn’t work that. Maybe you feel safer, but I imagine that’s because the guy you trust is in office. Objectively, we aren’t safer.
Excuse me???
Please Prove this asinine statement???
1) the first sentence makes no sense. Especially considering the tools to track terrorists and their finances were uncovered by some leftist nut job who apparently is suffering from BDS
2) again you think you know what someone is thinking how conveinent. Bush is not my guy.
3) prove the last sentence please. Show me how we are not safer. And do not use figures that were inflated by happenings in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But like a good lib you just throw mud in all directions and then tell everyone you are the smartest person in the room. You are not.
It’s not lazy to not agree with you, Lorica. It’s actually incredibly easy.
You are incredibly lazy in your logic, and incredibly arrogant in that laziness. Why don’t you spend some time soul searching what you believe, maybe, just maybe you will come back here abit more able to defend your comments. – Lorica
Why don’t you spend some time soul searching what you believe, maybe, just maybe you will come back here abit more able to defend your comments.
Man, you’re asking a lot for a liberal. In my experience, they don’t really believe “in” much of anything other than warm fuzzy platitudes and nebulous feel good ideas. The vast majority of them define themselves not by what they actually believe but by what they are against. Anything that is traditional, particularly if it’s proven to work. Anything conservatives or Republicans are for, they are against. In general, liberals define their entire existance by being opposite what the conservatives want or do. This strokes the ego of the type of people who need to feel like they are “fighting” against whatever they delude themselves into believing is an injustice against someone or something. They can pat themselves on the back as being morally superior by being negative against everything, convincing themselves that only they have good intentions and are not bigoted, violent, etc. whatever negative word or activity you care to insert here. Once again, for people who do not care to or are not capable of thinking instead of feeling, and aren’t ambitious enough or smart enough to create and build, this is obviously a way to feel good about thelselves. The old saw is that conservatives never are out protesting because they have families, jobs, things to do has more than a small grain of truth to it. Conservatives seem more focused on doing and building, not on being reactionary to what others do. Liberals define themselves based on what conservatives believe. I honestly think that without conservatives liberals wouldn’t know what to think.
Severian, well put.