Posted on 09/08/2006 12:10:14 PM PDT by forty_years
"Liberals" are urging ABC to censor its planned mini-series, "The Path To 911," stating, "Accounts of advance screenings indicate that this program places primary responsibility for the attacks of 9/11 on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration." Our Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." I don't see an exemption made for "advance screenings" by leftists. Remind you of the Islamist reaction to the Danish cartoons? Birds of a feather... If the Left doesn't like it, then it doesn't get shown? Is this what we've come to as a society?
Please explain, what is "liberal" about censoring a TV show? Such condescension towards the American people -- the Left's assumption being that Americans are too stupid to decide for themselves what happened on 911. Should the media only dish out negative coverage of Bush, but not of Clinton? Please contact ABC and urge them politely to go ahead with "The Path To 911." Here's a sample letter:
I urge you to resist calls to censor your special, "The Path To 911." Please air the mini-series as-is, and let the American people decide for themselves. 911 was a great tragedy. The last thing our country needs is less information about the event. Thank you.
ABC on-line comment form:
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html
ABC general comments, including telephone comment line:
77 West 66th Street New York, NY 10023
General Information 212-456-7777 (comment line)
Network News desk 212-456-2700
212-456-4866 (fax) or 212-456-2795 (fax)
Email: netaudr@abc.com
Robert Iger, President
Web: www.abc.com
This letter from democratic Congressmen sounds like an implied threat to me:
"Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation. The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events. We urge you, after full consideration of the facts, to uphold your responsibilities as a respected member of American society and as a beneficiary of the free use of the public airwaves to cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program.
Why bring up the fact that ABC's broadcast license is bestowed or withheld at the whim of the government? Any other reason than an implied threat?
I think not.
Yes... Really. Oh and if your going to post my comments please post the whole thing. Not an out of context snip.
Did President Clinton lose his right to free speech? If only average private citizens have free speech, how high a level can a person reach before he no longer has free speech?
If there is, God forbid, a Democratic Senate next year with Senator Clinton in a position of even greater power, there are many things she could do to use the power of the federal government to punish ABC.
Your imaginary punishments a year from now are not censorship. In a year, no one will remember this program. Heck, I hope I'm still in the running for my football pool Sunday night. Go Colts! Cover the spread! Like the overwhelming majority of Americans, I am unlikely to watch the program.
Thanks for the e-mail address. I wrote and I hope all Freepers do.
That's blasphemy. The media is suppose to be whitewashing the failures of the Clinton administration like they have been doing for the last 14 years.
Three major differences:
1) Reagan was totally disabled at the time and not far from death's door. (If Clinton was suffering from a fatal disease, there might be some merit in not wanting this shown. - of course one could argue that Clinton IS suffering from a disease)
2) The Reagan movie WAS shown - albeit on Showtime instead of CBS - but it still was shown without "edits".
3) No Republican congressmen sent implied threats to CBS about their broadcast license.
To late!The media reports they are making the changes.
Posted by Calvin Coollidge to ghostmonkey
On News/Activism 09/03/2006 1:02:13 AM EDT · 34 of 220
Clearly you have no clue what Marxism is about and your just tossing the word around as sort of pejorative. SO let me adress some of your points. You use the term "Liberaltarians." Thats very clever. Did you think of that all by yourself?
Modern day liberals (as opposed to the classical use of the term) support large governments that tries to tell people how to live their lives. I see no difference between either of the two parties currently in Washington on this point except which aspects of our lives you want to regulate. And one other minor difference. Democrats support big government and high taxes to pay for it. Republicans support big government and big debt to avoid paying for it.
"Liberaltarians support smoking dope..."
Rubbish. I don't know a single Libertarian who supports smoking dope. I (and most libertarians) do believe however that you have a God given right to be stupid if you wish, as long as society doesn't have to pay for your stupidity.
"...murdering unborn children..."
Thats a tough one. Many Libertarians do support that. I do not. To me abortion violates the most basic of libertarian principals. Your rights end when they intrude on someone else's. The Right to Life being foremost among those rights.
"... the homosexual agenda..."
Again your ignorance betrays you. We do NOT support any such thing. We believe that we (and you) have no right to impose our morality by legislation on others. What someone does in private with another consenting adult is between them and God. Its none of my business. And frankly its none of yours either. When the homos try to force by law or government action acceptance of their perverted (thats my private opinion) lifestyle on me or you or anyone else we oppose them.
"...destroying the moral foundations of the country..."
By which you mean the morals that you happen to think everyone else should abide by. Enough said.
"...judicial activism (provided that it benefits the liberaltarian agenda)..."
LMAO!!! Exactly how many libertarians have been appointing judges in this country? The only judicial activism that I have seen is by a court that has over the last half century been hell bent on aggrandizing the powers of the government to promote the interests of whichever of the two political parties happens to have been naming Supreme Court Justices. If you believe otherwise please give specific examples and not a lot of hot air.
"...illegal immigration..."
I have never met a Libertarian who supports illegal immigration. But if they did they are as entitled to their opinion as you are. Thats another difference between libertarians and GOPers and DU types. When we don't agree with you we will tell you but we won;t call you names generally or resort to childish tantrums. In fact we strongly believe in your right to spout your foolish invective.
"You also have the little matter of the two articles I posted where liberaltarians openly cheer for demonrats, and say that they prefer the company of liberals to conservatives."
Well actually you said Marxists not Democrats. And while you may equate the two (another example of your ignorance) I do not. As for preferring the company of one or the other thats one man's opinion. I generally am more comfortable around Republicans (excepting those in public office) since we tend to share the same outlook on things culturally politically much more so than Democrats. But to each their own.
They are going to cave soooooo deep Osama will be able to hide there! Hillary, Bill, and the Demstreet Media are all digging together on this one!
Yep. Those are my words. I stand by them.
Nice try for a dim plant.
LLS
Your points are good. See my 20
Should the network choose to change its tactics or pull the program based on Democrat whiners, that will pretty much be the end of that network on my television.
Already got forwarded an email appeal from moveon.org to petition the networks to cave in.
Harry Reid saying that their "license" may be in jeopardy IS a threat.
I added this text: "American families are watching the actions of ABC network very closely. My decision to watch programming and support your sponsors depend ENTIRELY on the actions taken by your network over the next 4 days."
www.vote.com sends your vote on the movie to ABC.
Last I checked 84 % voted for showing the movie.
Just listened to that horse's @ss O'realy carrying water for Bubba...."they can't show it if the Clintonistas say it isn't true"
What a rageing crock of sh*t!
As other poster notes, the Reagan smear was a trashy attempted character assassination of an honorable man on death's door, and this covers the run-up to a very serious war that is controversial (wish it weren't). Those of us grassroots people who acted against it targeted the advertisers, who I assume made their concerns kinown to the network. Here we have a National Socialist Rat leadership threatening ABC. Top down this time. We need to have these issues exposed for the good of the country.
I think the accuracy considerations have come with the heightened attention. Historical figure X did not actually say Y. Quite a different circumstance than a Reagan documentary that I understand was scathingly pointed from beginning to end.
Even if all the tweaking possible got done, the Left in this country will still be up in arms over the mini. This is because what they believe is the truth is not the truth. They believe with all their tiny hearts that Clinton Administration inaction is blameless, and all evil comes from the Bush Administration. Their being so wrong is what makes their protests not on the same par with the protests of the Reagan thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.