Great points you raise here. I dont agree with everything you have written but overall nice writing style….

When Clinton saw how easy it was to intimidate ABC, he quickly made a call to Wikipedia demanding that they change the intro to their article on Monica Lewinsky:…

Honora’s no driveby!

Alex K on September 7, 2006 at 5:15 PM

Now there’s something I never thought I’d hear! ;^)

Correction Honora,

CBS/Reagan IDIOT/not run
ABC/Clinton TURNED BACK ON TERRORISTS/run only favorable portrayals

I don’t assume the ABC thing is accurate, I can’t pass any judgement until I’ve seen it. Wish I could’ve seen it uncut. Or is that cut and run?

You most certainly had an opinion on Kean …..

2. Surely I’m not the only one who finds the fact that Kean (9/11 comm co-chair) got PAID for consulting on this a little bit indelicate, to say the least?

You seem to think Kean was “cashing in” on 9/11 by being paid as a consultant, and found that smarmy.

I would argue that the King of Smarmy was Michael Moore, who cashed in on 9/11 and was hailed as the hero of the left in this country.

fogw on September 7, 2006 at 4:54 PM

See you keep thinking your opinion is fact, when it is, your opinion. The Reagan piece was objected to mainly because it portrayed Nancy as a bit of a nut–astrology etc–and as having a lot of influence on RR in matters of policy. You think that makes RR look like an idiot, fine. You think it’s unfair, fine. But what you think isn’t the issue. The issue is that CBS was pressured to yank it, the same situation ABC now faces. You don’t see the parallel, well ok.

And there is that niggling little thing that ABC is touting this as “based on the 9/11 commission”. The Reagan thing was based on some no name screenplay.

Second you stated:

Funny how you libs love someone like Kean when he chairs the 9/11 commission and lays into the Bush administration

I responded that I don’t have a particular opinion on Kean one way or another–i.e. I don’t “love” him. I do find his action of parleying his position as Comm chair into $$$$ unseemly. I still cling to the notion that “anything for a buck” has its downside.

That said, I do not object to the ABC “docudrama”–isn’t that a sad little word. People presumably are still able to make informed judgments. I just think it’s a poor way to commemorate this sacred day.

The uproar and whinning by Clinton just proves what a cowardly lying wimp we all know he is. Just like a child caught in a lie and having the truth told about it. They whine and cry foul when their fake image is painted for what it really is.
Tom Kean,…

This isn’t something I’d normally ‘blog’ about, but it is worth a few comments:

As you probably know by now, ABC was planning on running a ‘docu-drama’ on what led up to the Terrorist attacks on 9-11-2001 (The Path to 9/11 )

While this was …

Liberals argure that this statement by Clinton was taken out of context by conservative news sources, but I just don’t see it. This is pretty cut and dry and it’s certainly clear whom Clinton was referring to in the statement….

You have Bethany flirting with you in front of the whole world, KP e-mailing you in the middle of the night, what’s next, White House Press Corps dinner with MKH on your arm?

They’ll finish editing it once they can make it look like Monica was an agent of OBL and Clinton was just trying to get information while ensuring her constitutional rights.

Torture by cigar, MCPO Airdale?

This is not to be believed. From a letter from Senate Dems to ABC (emphasis is Spruiell’s):

Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your……

We, as the most credible defender of the First Amendment, supported fully by the Democrat leadership and the party’s multiple wings, including the most liberal, and having equally supported faux-productions, like Fahrenheit 911, are utterly and totally oposed to Fauxmatography, or the post-production modification of movies, dramas and docu-dramas, except and unless they claim to be 100% in the category of documentaries.

A further lawsuit will be filed to address any modification of historical facts, i.e. modifying what “is is”. What was was and can’t be modified, no matter who files the request. We, after all are a democratic republic and not a kingdom.

Don’t you get the feeling that quite a few folks wish that the Clinton Administration attacked the terrorists with such vigor as he and others on the Left are attacking ABC for the upcoming miniseries The Path to 9/11, which appears to portray the Cl….

Bill Clinton and other members of his administration demanded ABC alter their upcoming show “The Path To 9/11″ specifically portions that show Clinton’s administration in a very bad light. Funny, they cry out against conservative objections over the…

Now a movie showing a standing WAR President getting killed, yeah thats ok to keep. Folks, this is a reality check and something better be done.

Google is now about to embark on “redoing” history literally with posting 300 years of news online for searching. Who will check it for accuracy? Not a Dem I hope.

What did Berger smuggle out in his socks anyway? Could it be…the evidence of this very incident???

Alex K on September 7, 2006 at 2:49 PM

What I want to know is why he shred so many documents related to this, at that time? And got away with it.

The conversation about Berger vs. Tenet is not that relevant.

Where the f–k (sorry but I can’t find a more decent substitute) was Bill Clinton, our President of that time to make that decision? That’s the only question!

And that’s why they’re so up in arms.

No one should boycott this drama (in any form) and many should buy it in any version. We are smart enough to know fact from fiction and where the blame really lies. After all we’re not Fahrenheit 911 watchers.

Yes, the topic of Homeland Security and WOT should stay on the table until Nov. 7, whatever it takes! May the better party on these two (and only topics which matter) win!