Skip to comments.With 9/11 Film, Kean Finds Tough Critic in Hamilton(MSM Barf Alert)
Posted on 09/12/2006 9:22:42 AM PDT by khnyny
With 9/11 Film, Kean Finds Tough Critic in Hamilton
By Dana Milbank Tuesday, September 12, 2006; A02
There have been few political love stories as beautiful as that of Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, the former chairman and vice chairman of the 9/11 commission.
"I have never worked with anybody I've come to respect more than Lee Hamilton," Republican Kean said at a Sept. 11 fifth-anniversary joint performance with Hamilton yesterday.
"He is one of the preeminent public servants of our day, bar none," came Democrat Hamilton's well-worn reply.
So it packed even more punch when Hamilton, at the National Press Club luncheon, lectured his friend about the falsified Sept. 11 docudrama Kean helped ABC produce.
"It is either a documentary or it is a drama, and to fudge it causes me a great deal of concern and suggests to me that news and entertainment are getting dangerously intertwined," the former congressman from Indiana said of his friend's film. "And I do not think that that is good for the country, because an event of this consequence is very hard to understand, and to distort it or not to present it factually in this kind of a presentation, I think, does not serve the country well."
Kean, the "co-executive producer" of this disservice, stood at Hamilton's side, his hands clasped in front of him, grinning awkwardly.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
[Critics on the left say Kean's bout of partisanship was brought on by the campaign of his son Tom Jr. for a Senate seat from New Jersey (ABC News was confused enough between father and son to say in its political calendar that "candidate Tom Kean Jr." was appearing with Hamilton).]
Everyone should see the picture on the WP's website showing Hamilton and Kean - priceless.
What's this, a love affair between Kean and Hamilton? I didn't know that New Jersey had two gay governors. Who'd of thunk it?
Shows how partisan the 9-11 Ommission was. The "Republicans" on the committee were all mostly RINOs, while the Democrats were hard core partisans like Ben Viniste, Goerlick, Roemer and Hamilton. That explains why the Goerlick wall was ignored, Able Danger white washed and Saddam's connections to Al Qaeda underplayed. That also explains the silly grading nonsense they gave to the administration's response to terrorism since 9-11 and the vaunted F grades they were given, almost all of it by the way on things not related to preventing terrorism.
Lol. Hamilton looks like he's preaching from a pulpit and Kean looks like he wants to strangle him.
Yep, you are so right. Hmm, why can't we read this in the WP?
The picture you mentioned is priceless.
I think a case can be made that the news reprter has an obligation to point out that Lee Hamilton sits on the Board of Directors of Samuel Berger's company, Stonebridge-International.....Just as you did.
The GOOD news of this caper is that because Hamilton and Kean have some wisdom and both are gentlemen; they agree to disagree. They are not hurling invective at each other the way many others do....
Restore Civility in Debate, Government
By John E. Carey
The Washington Times
September 12, 2006
There seems a lack of civility, good manners, decorum and protocol in Washington these days.
One side frequently calls the other side names; instead of making organized, logical arguments.
We entered the world of the blogosphere on July 4, 2006. In this internet land of people discussing world events, the language often is particularly harsh, polarizing and nasty.
An exchange between President Bush and the Today shows Matt Lauer on the anniversary of 9/11 caused a flurry of discussion on some web sites. Lauer seemed to have an aggressive, even badgering tone with the president as the two stood in the Oval Office discussing 9/11 and other issues of the day. Lauer repeatedly gestured in an aggressive way, almost sticking his finger in the presidents chest.
On Sunday, September 10, 2001, on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace asked Democratic National Committee Chairman and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean if he would now apologize to Karl Rove.
It seems, despite Deans accusations that Rove was the leaker in the Valery Plame escapade, that Richard Armitage was the unfortunate and inadvertent leaker.
Gov. Dean answered, Absolutely not. I still think he should be fired.
Armitage apologized in public. Dean could not.
Does it matter? Sure it does.
Thoughtful, courteous national discourse has managed to get us through a revolution against the most powerful nation on the Earth, a War Between the States, two World Wars and other tragedies and trying times.
If we can get along, maybe we can discuss the problems and get the best answers. Maybe a more civil and etiquette-driven discussion of the issues can help us get through the War on Terror.
Instead, we have become a nation led by name-callers, insult-slingers and generally rude, angry and impolite representatives.
And sometimes, the media, maybe unintentionally, magnify the animosity. This is what many conservatives saw during Matt Lauer's questioning of President Bush on September 11, 2006.
My friend retired Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters at The New York Post wonders about "the unscrupulous nature of those in the media who always discover a dark cloud in the brightest silver lining. They are terror's cheerleaders."
What does this teach our children? And does it do us any good?
Our American history is full of great men who teach us the importance of good conduct for the common good. Some say George Washington actually authored The Rules of Civility and Decent Behaviour [sic] in Company and Conversation.
Though not the author, Washington embraced good manners so famously that the Rules could easily have been his own creation. The good manners of John Adams also echo to us through history. With Thomas Paine, Adams watched a young American officer conduct himself less than diplomatically and courteously before the King of France.
Adams wrote to his wife, describing the Man of Choleric Temper. Adams said the man like so many Gentlemen from his State, is abrupt and undiplomatic. Last evening, at a Royal Reception, he confronted His Most Christian Majesty Louis XVI with Words both ardent and impatient, whilst Mr. Paine wrung his Hands at the other mans lack of Tact. Never did I think that I would see our impetuous Paine so paind by anothers want of Courtesy and Civility. To our amazement, however, the King took [the mans] Enthusiasm in good Part.
When told one of his generals, John C. Fremont, had been nominated by a group of 400 anti-Lincoln loyalists to run for president, Lincoln opened a Bible and read aloud from I Samuel:22, And everyone that was in distress, and everyone that was in debt, and everyone that was discontented gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them; and there were with him about four hundred men.
Modern statesmen pulled the country together, not by tearing others apart or barking at the media, but more often by thoughtful discourse and conduct. Both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt operated beautifully on the reporters who surrounded them, wrote David Keirsey and Ray Choiniere in Presidential Temperament.
Both used the press as if it were their own publicity machine.
This was largely achieved in a civil, diplomatic style.
A modern day solon of wisdom and truth might be former Indiana Congressman and Democrat Lee Hamilton. Hamilton volunteered some stern remarks about the importance of truth. "Facts are not Republican and they're not Democrat," he said. "They're not ideological. Facts are facts."
I cannot ever recall seeing John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, or George W. Bush look petulant, angry or rude. Or terribly distort the facts.
Other great national leaders also reflect respect, even admiration, for the importance of good protocol and decorum.
Winston Churchill described a 1941 university ceremony this way: The blitz was running hard at that time, and the night before, the raid had been heavy. Several hundreds had been killed and wounded. Many houses were destroyed. Buildings next to the university were still burning, and many of the university authorities who conducted the ceremony had pulled on their robes over uniforms begrimed and drenched; but all was presented with faultless ritual and appropriate decorum, and I sustained a very strong and invigorating impression of the superiority of man over the forces that can destroy him.
Lets hope our leaders become enlightened enough to avoid the forces that can destroy them. For our sake and the sake of our children.
I regret the times that bad conduct, anger and a disregard for etiquette got the best of me. I hope our present day political leaders see the light too.
Karl Rove usually has a wonderful sense for the correct tone to set.
Howard Dean seems tone deaf. But we have hope for his salvation!
To get though the war against terror and to achieve victory, a united, clear-thinking leadership just might be important.
Angry rhetoric and arson with clever words serves no good purpose.
Thanks for your post, you are such a great writer.
We never really had anyone on our side on that committee. I would have like to had a statesman like Alan Simpson participate.
I saw the whole thing and was dissapointed. The only people that were made to look good were:
O'Neill (now dead)
Masood (now dead)
Clarke (now employed by ABC)
Gore (potential 2008 rat prez candidate)
I added Gore because the whole chad fiasco was ignored and they only showed him giving a normal concession speech.
Everyone else in the movie was an incompetent buffoon except Clarke himself, the only person that saved us when the planes hit. Cheney and Rice didn't know what to do, according to the movie.
I liked part 1 because it trashed the Clinton gang. After seeing part 2 I realized what the ABC agenda was:
IMHO, it further polarizes the country when a reporter for a major newspaper does such a sloppy job of covering a story with so much obvious bias. The poor reader is left with a very slanted and incomplete picture, which really in the end, helps no one.
Which was directly related to the delay in putting together a transition team.
Clarke did manage to make himself look good. I guess everyone likes to make themselves the hero of their own story. I doubt Gore will run again, but who knows.
Agreed. Hindsight can be 20/20. Can't come soon enough.
It looks like Kean is still rolling over.
I especially loved Stuffanupolous interviewing Clarke yesterday (I mean, no attempt to hide the connection right?), as Clarke proclaimed they suspected something may happen like 9-11 "months" before.