Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flashback - Tom Daschle, said CBS' decision "smells of intimidation to me."
CNN ^ | Wednesday, November 5, 2003 Posted: 8:58 AM EST (1358 GMT)

Posted on 09/11/2006 6:42:04 AM PDT by Perdogg

NEW YORK (AP) -- Capping an extraordinary conservative furor over a movie virtually no one has seen, CBS said Tuesday it will not air "The Reagans" and shunt it off to the Showtime cable network instead.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: deeplysaddened; doublestandard; fakebutaccurate; mediabias; pathto911; reagannation; reagans; thepathto911; thereagans

1 posted on 09/11/2006 6:42:05 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
I don't think the stories compare.

The Democrat party threatened ABC to edit or pull a factual drama- where I believe each scene is documented.

But the Reagan special was a fictional hatchet job written to order and stopped only by people who loved Reagan.
2 posted on 09/11/2006 6:49:06 AM PDT by Vision ("As a man thinks...so is he." Proverbs 23:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vision

"But the Reagan special was a fictional hatchet job written to order and stopped only by people who loved Reagan."

Yep and not to mention he WAS ON HIS DEATH BED at the time of the scheduled airing!

A little something they fail to include with their protests.


3 posted on 09/11/2006 6:51:02 AM PDT by poobear (Political Left, continually accusing their foes of what THEY themselves do every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

There's a big difference between consumer pressure and threats from a political party.


4 posted on 09/11/2006 6:52:01 AM PDT by cripplecreek (If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
There's a big difference between consumer pressure and threats from a political party.

That there is. Consumer pressure I will support; political pressure I will not.
5 posted on 09/11/2006 6:54:14 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vision

Remember, it was mostly ordinary citizens complaining about the Reagans, not members of the Reagan Administration, unlike the Path to 9/11, which was mostly complained about by former Clinton Administration officials.


6 posted on 09/11/2006 6:54:59 AM PDT by sportutegrl (A person is a person, no matter how small. (Dr. Seuss))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: P-40

When asked about the Bush Assassination movie, the white house only said that they wouldn't dignify it with a response. Interesting contrast between the responses to the two movies isn't it?


7 posted on 09/11/2006 6:57:37 AM PDT by cripplecreek (If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
right, I have no problem with people having problems, but elected officials threatening to take away licenses is chilling.
8 posted on 09/11/2006 6:59:35 AM PDT by Perdogg (If you stay home in November, you will elect Pelosi speaker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
it was mostly ordinary citizens complaining about the Reagans

I don't even have a problem with politicians expressing their personal opinions about the mini-series....but when they start using the position of their office to censure the media...that can be problematic. Was the mini-series a national security threat?
9 posted on 09/11/2006 7:03:17 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

The two don't compare.

TheReagans was written by two homsexuals who admitted they were making up scenes in order to change the perception of reagan.

Additionally, this was private individuals doing a private protest. There were not senators jumping in to threaten special hearings or subpoena power.


10 posted on 09/11/2006 7:10:19 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

If the two situations are similar, could you please tell me which five Republican Senators sent a threatening letter to CBS insinuating the termination of their broadcast license.


11 posted on 09/11/2006 7:12:01 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (The investigation was a hoax. Fitz should be brought up on charges.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-40

keep in mind also the suit DID try and edit out the fake scenes and could not do so and still have a viewable film.


12 posted on 09/11/2006 7:16:08 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vision

"I don't think the stories compare."

You are correct, but ultimately, the results were the same and somewhat hypocritical now. This won't likely make me all too popular here, but what's good for one is good for the other. Any sort of censorship is bad for all of us.
I think the opposition to the Regan bit was correct in asserting it's displeasure. But shame on the network for caving in to that pressure. Same goes with the recent decision to edit the 9/11 piece. I think the reaction by both networks in both instances should be labeled as shameless. Depends on what they consider their mission; can one call it a bad business decision? You either have to stand up for all that's fair and correct, or cave in to public sentiment for the sake of keeping your viewer base.
The liberals took it a step further this time, however. Threatening their broadcast license should constitute a flagrant abuse of their positions, and they should be prosecuted for such. They are political figures currently in office and they threatened to abuse said position for political reasons. Surely this has to be somehow illegal?
Welcome to China... we will watch what they say when they say it.


13 posted on 09/11/2006 7:16:48 AM PDT by FunkyZero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

And Tom Daschle has the stink of LOSER on him.

I don't know why Clinton and his flunkies care about this film anyway. The millions of morons out there who still worship him will continue to do so. He kept our nation peaceful and prosperous, they say! Even if there were video of him handing cash to bin laden, his approval rating would remain sky high.


14 posted on 09/11/2006 7:18:18 AM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
"Ironically, CBS' decision came two days after the network's 75th anniversary special, which included a skit by the Smothers Brothers poking fun at CBS for firing them more than 30 years ago because of their political content.

"Another precedent came in 1979, when CBS pulled a comedy series about a black congressman after complaints by some actual black politicians who had seen a screening, said TV historian Tim Brooks"

15 posted on 09/11/2006 7:30:06 AM PDT by BenLurkin ("The entire remedy is with the people." - W. H. Harrison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TNCMAXQ
Someday, I look forward to the docudrama covering Loral Space, Bernie Schwartz, the Red Chinese, our nuclear weapons technology, Clinton and DNC kickbacks. The second night, it'll be Algore's earth-tone presidential campaign, the donations from Buddhist Nuns in sequentially numbered cashiers' checks. Finally, Big Al tries to prevent members of the US military overseas from casting ballots...
16 posted on 09/11/2006 7:31:14 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
I think the opposition to the Regan bit was correct in asserting it's displeasure

When did they do a Donald Regan biography?

17 posted on 09/11/2006 7:31:33 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
I don't consider it censorship; it wasn't a true story, it was slander.

If a movie was about to come out on the Clintons which wasn't true I'd have no problem with it being pulled. The path to 9/11 is factual and it's a crime to have had the thing edited.
18 posted on 09/11/2006 7:42:41 AM PDT by Vision ("As a man thinks...so is he." Proverbs 23:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM; longtermmemmory

see comment #8.


19 posted on 09/11/2006 8:44:15 AM PDT by Perdogg (If you stay home in November, you will elect Pelosi speaker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Vision

So every JFK whacko conspiracy show that has ever been broadcast on discovery should fall into this category and removed from airing?
Don't get me wrong, I mean no disrespect for your opinion. Functionally, I agree with most everyone here when it comes to the content of both. I'd like to be the one to smack the face of anyone who would slander Reagan, he's one of my best heroes... but people should be allowed to judge for themselves.
Sure, you have the Michael Moore followers and the damage his work does to the truth is usually not repairable. But this isn't completely the fault of persons like Michael Moore, it's the people who believe it.
Remember, you simply cannot fix stupid. These crackpots and their followers are something we will always have to live with, but the minute we start trying to squelch them is the moment we begin losing our own freedoms. I'm not willing to give up mine in the name of hushing the other side, as blatant as their lies may be.


20 posted on 09/11/2006 8:53:36 AM PDT by FunkyZero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

It wasn't a documentary, it was outright blasphemy. Very little about it was in line with the truth or President Reagan himself.
Keep in mind, I never personally watched it, I only know what I have read of it's contents.


21 posted on 09/11/2006 8:56:35 AM PDT by FunkyZero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
These crackpots and their followers are something we will always have to live with, but the minute we start trying to squelch them is the moment we begin losing our own freedoms. I'm not willing to give up mine in the name of hushing the other side, as blatant as their lies may be.

On this I agree. It's the price we pay for freedom, and all things considered, it's a relatively small price.

22 posted on 09/11/2006 8:59:29 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

JFK is dead and is an unsolved assassination. And in all the shows on it have you ever seen anything like slander?


23 posted on 09/11/2006 9:07:53 AM PDT by Vision ("As a man thinks...so is he." Proverbs 23:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson