| USA Today | 0 | |
| CNN | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| Jen Rubin | 0 | |
| Fox News | Source: Powerful Sedative Propofol Found at Michael Jackson’s Mansion |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Flyswatter in Chief:
"He had this fly that was persistently buzzing around him during the interview...he swatted his hand and he said ‘I got the sucker’...it was a, you know, Dirty Harry ‘make my day’ moment."- The NYT's John Harwood, describing Obama's killing of a fly - 6/16/09
Am I living in some alternative reality here?
What in the hell is going on?
Just when you think it couldn’t get any worse, we find out this evening through several news links provided by Allah that rather than revise ABC’s “The Path to 9-11“, the Demofascists want it pulled altogether.
Proof? First, via AP (emphasis added):
Former Clinton administration officials, historians and a Democratic petition with nearly 200,000 signatures urged the network to scrap the five-hour drama.
[...]
A group of historians, including Arthur Schlesinger Jr. and Princeton University’s Sean Wilentz, wrote to ABC parent Walt Disney Co. CEO Robert Iger, urging him to scrap the series. They said that permitting inaccuracies to heighten drama is “disingenuous and dangerous.”
The Democratic National Committee said it delivered a petition with nearly 200,000 signatures to ABC’s Washington office urging the network drop its “right-wing factually inaccurate mocudrama.”
Former national security adviser Samuel R. Berger and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, whose depictions are at the center of the controversy, asked Thomas Kean, the Republican ex-governor of New Jersey who led the commission looking into the attacks, to use his influence with filmmakers to pull it.
“You can’t fix it,” Berger said on CNN. “You gotta yank it.”
You gotta yank it.
Next up, DNC Chair Howard Dean calling for the series to be pulled and joining in the vieled threats game (again, emphasis added):
It’s deeply disappointing that ABC would put something on the air that has been proven to have factual inaccuracies about one of the most important events in our nation’s history. ABC should not air this distortion of history.
The fact that the writer/producer of the piece is a well known conservative raises additional concerns and questions. The American people deserve to know who funded this $40 million dollar slanderous propaganda. Use of the public airwaves is a privilege conferred upon broadcasters in the public interest. It comes with a responsibility to the American people and a responsibility to the truth.
Comprende? The message: Even if you do revise it, don’t air it, because it was written by a right-winger whose sole mission is to distort the Clinton legacy. If you do decide to air it, expect to be questioned and grilled about whether or not you deserve to be able to retain your broadcast license.
Apparently the Dr. of Disology hasn’t been informed that the executive producer of this docudrama is a Democrat who has a history of supporting Bill Clinton and other Democrats.
It’s disgusting that right here before 9-11, the worst terrorist attack to ever hit our nation, and the event that was the catalyst for the war on terror – a war in which we’re fighting to spread freedom and democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq – that Howard Dean and other Demofascists in his party are issuing threats over a mini-series because it portrays Bubba and Co. and their record on terrorism in an unflattering light. So much for setting a good example of what life is like in a free society!
I wrote the following a couple of days ago, and think it’s worth mentioning again:
There is a reason Sandy Berger got caught with taking highly classified documents on the thwarted Y2K terrorist attack from the National Archives and intentionally destroying them. There are things that the Clinton administration did not do that they don’t want you to know about. The 9-11 Commission report mentioned some of them, but how many people actually read it? I believe the Clinton admin knows more people will watch this docudrama than read the 9-11 Commission report, and that’s what’s got them (and the Clinton faithful on the left) so fired up. They were content with their inaction being documented in the commission’s report because of two things 1) because the report put equal blame on both admins and 2) only diehard political junkies would read it.
The Democrats are running scared right now – for a reason, and one we all know:
This movie, obviously, strikes at the heart of the Democrats’ weakness: their, ahem, questionable ability to fight the war on terror. National security has been an issue they’ve been especially weak on since 9-11, and the only reason they are polling higher on it now is because people are frustrated with the war in Iraq. Has nothing to do with people actually thinking Democrats could turn things around there, because if Democrats could turn things around there they would have released a more comprehensive plan to the public that went beyond a cut and run strategy, a strategy that is, sadly, winning the hearts and minds of more and more Democrats. Strange, eh? They don’t want to look weak on national security, but they put all their weight behind cut and runners like Ned Lamont. You cannot make this stuff up.
The old saying goes something like “methinks the lady doth protest too much” – in this case, the Democrats are doing just that: they’re protesting too much. In fact, they’re going further than just protesting, they’re actively pushing ABC to cancel this docudrama and are issuing veiled threats about revoking their broadcast license. Now, they don’t have the authority to do that, but the fact that they are even suggesting it sends a cold shiver up my spine.
I have seen Democrat after Democrat complain and b!tch about Bush over the years and how he supposedly likes to ’suppress’ contrary speech at events in which he appears, but strangely enough I don’t see those same Democrats complaining now when there’s a real effort to suppress freedom of speech under threat by people in their own party. In fact, I haven’t seen a single Democrat in Congress, or anywhere else, protest this despicable move by the DNC.
The DNC’s new motto should be: Free speech for me, but not for thee!
Here is, once again, the Clinton’s approach to terrorism:
Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil, do nothing about evil
Never forget 9-11. And never forget that the Clinton administration’s gross incompetency at a time when Al Qaeda was growing stronger contributed to it much more than they want you to know. No amount of editing, revising, whitewashing, or shelving a story can change that fact, no matter how much the Clintonistas and the DNC would like it to. They can try to fight the truth in an election year, but the truth can’t be revised. It is what it is.
More: Ed Driscoll makes a great point:
“Democrats can fight long, hard, and dirty when they want to. If they actually chose to defend America itself against its enemies with as much force as they deploy during election-time, they would never have to rely on such tactics in the first place.”
Prior:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
16 Responses to “Am I living in some alternative reality here?”
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
Sis,
We only need to understand two things about the Dems:
1. Nothing is more important that political power. Not the Constitution, not the law, not common decency. Nothing.
2. The biggest threat and greatest enemy in the world today is not islamofascism. It is George W. Bush. If it hurts Bush, it is a good thing even if it helps islamofascism and endangers America.
Keep those two principles in mind and you can understand, no, you can predict almost anything they do.
Stomp on the free speech and demand a cover up of Bubba’s indifference to global terrorism? Hey, it’s an election year, so allowing free speech here might hurt our chances. See Principle # 1.
Or, if you’re the NY Times and you can destroy a successful program concentrating on disrupting terrorist cash flow, you put it on the front page. Helps the terrorists, yes, but if you think it’ll hurt Bush, go with it. See Principle # 2.
Name any action they take, and you’ll be able to trace it back to one or both of their guiding principles.
This soon before we take notice and remember the terrorist attack on America on 9-11, the Democrats decide they must initiate another terrorist attack themselves ……but this time on the Rights of Americans.
Well played Democrats!
I know Democrats are loathe to share the spotlight with anyone else, but to try and steal it away from the terrorist ….that takes cajones.
Article on the Huffington Post where this guy really doesn’t get how facist he sounds talking about how difficult things could get for Disney with various things that Disney is lobbying for on Capitol Hill.
Don’t you donkey’s see the problem with big government? It leads to facism, socialism and lack of freedom.
The writer, interviewed today on Medved’s show, may be right wing, but the executive producer is decidedly not. One caller was cut off by Medved using the “dump” button because the caller said he hoped the writer, Cyrus, whose last name eludes me, would die. He says he gets that a lot.
Another point is the I keep hearing about all these inaccuracies, but I never hear any examples. Perhaps they just don’t want to spoil the show for us.
- My fondest hope is the FascistCrats keep right on with this public display of their Gestopo tactics. Up until now a lot of American voters have not seen the sort of stuff that gos on here in the blogosphere among the oh so tolorant Left cult that pass’s itself off as a “Democratic” party. All you ever needed to do is try sometime, on any one of the Lefty blogsites, to post ANYTHING thats counter, or try to debate, and the jack boots rush in and kill your posts.
- If the Disney Producers are smart they’ll keep everything the Dems are stupid enough to send them in writing, and then expose it all and fight for all those 1st amendment writes the Left has been beating us over the head with every day for 6+ years. This craziness needs to be exposed and expunged from our country. I’m beginning to view the Left as a menace to America, and our Republic as we know it.
- Bring it on Libturds….bring it on!!!!
- Bang
“the public airwaves”…and this clearly demonstrates a primary hazard in the project to turn *everything* into “the public something-or-other,” whether that something is healthcare or electricity or railroads or food stores. Along with “public” status goes political influence and attempted control.
What if this program was being transmitted entirely over the unregulated Internet rather than over the airwaves? Would the Democrats argue that public funding of the Internet predecessor network, ARPANET, trumped the First Amendment? If the servers took their electricity from a government-operated dam, would they now be talking about “the public electrical grid?”
Well done on the blog, I’ll have to add it to my fav list. I am always looking for new people to read and comment at my blog. come check it out!!!
“the public airwaves”…and this clearly demonstrates a primary hazard in the project to turn *everything* into “the public something-or-other” whether that something is healthcare or electricity or railroads or food stores. Along with “public” status goes political influence and attempted control.
Excellent observation. This is exactly why the liberals and socialists want to make everything “public” and start every argument trying to restrict a person’s rights and freedoms with “well, for the public good…” It’s a rationale used to justify destruction of individual rights and liberties in order to increase government power, which is exactly why fascists evolve out of socialists, control and “groupthink” are more important than individuality and such concepts as personal responsibility.
I am in agreement with David Foster. What if the Dems suceed in pressuring Disney to pull this movie, they will then start to flex their muscles in other areas. Especially if they get back into power.
I still believe that this is another event that will lead up to an “October Surprise”. These guys are simply clueless as to how this looks to the great undecided. Or to those who are waivering. I don’t understand how they don’t understand that they look like crazed facist with all this BS, or is it BDS.
Someone needs to tell them to shut up and let the thing stand on it’s own merits. Let the people decide, but as for me, the more they complain the more I plan to watch. Hell now I am going to tape the thing, so I can watch it until the Director’s Cut comes out. This coming from the guy that would spit, so to speak, whenever I saw a commercial for this thing, not trusting the network that it was playing on. – Lorica
As a conservative I STRONLY urge ABC to correct the falsehoods and misrepresentations in the upcoming “Path to 9/11″ before it is shown. And I am not the only conservative say this.
John Podhoretz, conservative columnist and Fox News contributor says: The portrait of Albright is an unacceptable revision of recent history and an unfair mark on a public servant who, no matter her shortcomings, doesn’t deserve to be remembered by millions of Americans as the inadvertent (and truculent) savior of Osama bin Laden. Samuel Berger, Clinton’s national security adviser, also seems to have just cause for complaint.
James Taranto, OpinionJournal.com editor says: The Clintonites may have a point here. A few years ago, when the shoe was on the other foot, we were happy to see CBS scotch “The Reagans.”
Dean Barnett, conservative commentator posting on Hugh Hewitt’s blog says: One can (if one so chooses) give the filmmakers artistic license to [fabricate a scene]. But if that is what they have done, conservative analysts who back this movie as a historical document will mortgage their credibility doing so.
Chris Wallace, Fox News Sunday anchor says: When you put somebody on the screen and say that’s Madeleine Albright and she said this in a specific conversation and she never did say it, I think it’s slanderous, I think it’s defamatory and I think that ABC and Disney should be held to account.
Captain’s Quarters blog says: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.
Bill Bennett, conservative author, radio host, and TV commentator says: Look, “The Path to 9/11″ is strewn with a lot of problems and I think there were problems in the Clinton administration. But that’s no reason to falsify the record, falsify conversations by either the president or his leading people and you know it just shouldn’t happen.
Brian, I’ve already addressed what other conservatives have had to say about this movie – and I stand by what I said.
Also, you don’t have to hit the post button but one time. Your message came up three times in the mod que.
Lorica, I agree 100%. If the Clintonians hadn’t complained and wanted the network to pull the show, I would have given it a miss. Now, I’ve programed my old VCR, and am armed with VHS tapes, and we shall see what part of history Billory Inc. wants to re-write.
Who, from those blathering and threatening, actually has seen “path to 9/11″ or previewed it?
I wonder how many that are raving like maniacs in the press has even previewed it before going off at the mouth.
Shouldn’t outrage be AFTER a movie is viewed and then people can say, “Hey, that is inaccurate!” or “That was complete BS”?
I think there are alot of people like this out there. They go on and on about how hateful, or how this is a consiracy, or it was inaccurate, or slanderous…then you ask if if they watched the movie or if they read the book, and they say…”well, no, but I HEARD from others it is…”
Whats interesting is, I heard, and only have one link so far that discusses this, that Clinton was the one who failed not Albright and Berger….
Link
If this is true, and Patterson is correct, then it really is not a wonder that Clinton is screaming bloody murder and Democrats are visibly without any cover, trying to force ABC from showing this.
Not only is this a deadly blow to Clinton’s “Legacy” (and you know how much he wanted that), but it also shows that Democrats WHILE IN POWER, just how badly they were weak on protecting this country – even when confronted with opportunities to deal with the situation.
I think I am of similiar mind to many that have spoke about this, that it should be left to the PUBLIC to view and make that determination. This isn’t a doumentary, like Moore tried to portrait his as.
And even to take the devils advocate and say that even if it isn’t completely correct, who says it has to be? Who says United 93 was completely correct? or any of the other multitude of movies I am sure that will be made about this terrible event in the years to come?
Let the public decide.