Apparently, ABC is going with the defamatory two-part movie, "The Path to 9-11." When all else fails, wrongfully blame Clinton for George W. Bush's failures. Apparently, the same network will even allow Bush to address Americans at 9:00 PM That night, right in the middle of the movie's airing.
Any moderate or progressive, indeed any conservative who values the truth, who continues to watch ABC after this is doing him or herself, and the nation, a real disservice.
New evidence revealed by The Democratic Underground and ThinkProgress.org finds that a right-wing fundamentalist cabal is behind this film. Additionally, Portions of the film are based on the work of the White House Deputy Director of Public Affairs. This is clearly, illegal propaganda geared toward one thing: rewriting history and hijacking an election.
If you watch the movie you provide ratings. Cable and satellite companies keep track. Let the boycott begin!
I remember the ruckus over The Reagans TV Miniseries and thought CBS was wrong to cancel it in 2003. I had to rent the DVD. Critics charged it was revisionsism. I thought it was actually a sympathetic portrayal and reasonably fair.
So I say let ABC show it first, then comment on it. I'm reserving judgement.
I don't have a problem with historical dramas. Some people may confuse art with reality but that is their problem.
I think there is plenty of blame on the bin Laden issue to pass around. Clinton and Bush both failed to get him. Clinton's missiles missed and the Bush border policy let the terrorists into the country.
As I understand it, the series purports to show a Clinton Administration distracted by domestic issues. I not entierly sure that that is incorrect.
Even if the boycott isn't across the board on every program by everyone, an across the board boycott coupled with a selective boycott by others would still hurt Disney's bottom line. I will be more than happy to lend my support to the great majority of these items and will be happy to steer clear of advertisers.
A lot of partisan bullshit.
I'd rather watch MSNBC not much better, but way less crap.
BURN UP MY PHONES.
Where was Bush for the entire month of August in 2001? Hell, where was he when 9/11 was actually going down? He was reading a children's book right? What about his advisors? Does anyone remember "I believe the title was 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the U.S.'"
Why did the Bush administration direct resources away from anti-terrorism units? Why are the STILL not adequately funding them today?
You know I was behind this administration with respect to terrorism when 9/11 happened just like a lot of Democrats. But Bush overstepped his bounds in regards to civil liberties and chasing the ghost of his father's past in Iraq. Bush pissed that goodwill away slowly over time with stupid phrases like "Mission Accomplished" and is going to need a lot of polishing to make his legacy half of what Clinton's is.
The flip side of your statement about Clinton is that the Republican controlled Congress did nothing but fritter their resources in trying to remove Clinton from office. I forgot but who spent millions of dollars and countless months trying to nail Clinton. Republicans were not looking at terrorism either. They were looking at scoring political points. Newt, Dick Armey, and Dennis Hastert share an equal blame for 9/11 because of the quest to make another Watergate with Clinton.
Republicans: Sex Before Security
Of course, the actual inauguration took place over 7 months before the terrorist attack. While the Bush administration does not bear the full brunt of the blame, it is significant that the attack to place under its watch.
My initial feelings were that IT WAS appropriate to give the Bush White House a pass on this event. All new administrations go up a steep learning curve in the first couple years--this is simply a reality, and one of the tradeoffs in our system of government.
However, I have been absolutely disgusted with Bush and the GOPs use of the war on terror and the memory of the 9/11 victims as a political tool. Absolutely no class, no conscience, dispicable.
The Bush administration's handling of events since 9/11 calls into question it's competence across the board. Truly shameful.
Btw, as much as I am disgusted by the Riley/Publius's of the world, I will refrain from bashing them on September 11th. Today by my reckoning though it is Sunday, September 10th.
One more point: Bill Clinton, even if he had wanted to go into Afghanistan to nab bin Laden, was hamstrung by an out-of-control, obsessed Republican Congress, which was hell-bent on impeaching for the "high crime" of a consensual sex act. Wrong? Yes. Impeachable? Obviously not. In contrast, how about ignoring clear warnings that Al Qaeda was preparing to strike the US, then lying to take us to war in Iraq (thereby siphoning crucial resources, like UAVs, from Afghanistan and the hunt for bin Laden)? As the Washington Post writes today, it's at least in part due to the Iraq distraction that "Bin Laden Trail 'Stone Cold.'" Heckuva job by the Bush Administration. Nah, better off ignoring that and blaming a guy who hasn't been in the White House for 6 years now. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Bush always claims that his critics "don't understand" the terrorist threat. But Bush's record suggests the complete opposite conclusion. Once again, the way that Bush is framing the current debate is part of the problem.
Nope.
Only Trolls make fake names and live fake lives.
What's wrong little bobby? No one to play with outside?
Oh.. wait.. I can find out his real name..
It's called.. IP addy.
=)
Welcome Aboard! I hope you have the guts to take the hits from all these "liberals". We are a lot tougher (bloggers) than the liberal media would ever say.
Grrrrrrrr....
Oorah!
Rally up, everyone. Let's kick "bobby" back to wherever he came from.
i can assure you that my television will not be tuned to any show on abc for at least a year. if they actually show the garbage i don't think that i will ever go there again. there are lots of networks with better programming.