Saturday, September 09, 2006

The Path to 9/11 

Lots of hoo-hah about this film. I don't know if I'll watch or not, but all the "debate" has prompted the following thoughts in my feverish brain:

CBS News ran a story on Bush's TANG service and ultimately justified it as "fake but accurate."

ABC Entertainment produces a dramatized account of what led to the attacks of 9/11 and says upfront that it has exercised dramatic license in order to get the correct overview of the story.

The Left didn't make so much as a peep about a "fake but accurate" news story, but raises holy Hell about an admittedly fictional dramatization of an 8-year process beginning with the first WTC bombing and ending on 9/11.

The Right raised holy Hell about the "fake but accurate" news story, but isn't complaining at all about the dramatization that by all accounts doesn't treat the Bushies any better than the Clintonistas.

Anybody has the right to raise holy Hell about anything they don't like. First Amendment.

The Democrats are now hinting about revoking ABC's broadcast license if they run the program.
Last time I looked, the First Amendment prohibited exactly that kind of thing.

Now, which is the party of the people? Which party stands for the Constitution? Which party is more trustworthy in regards to protecting constitutional rights for everyone?

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?