Free speech! Free speech! Free speech!
Funny. Michae| Moore can make a "documentary" railing against Presiden+ Bush's alleged incompetence leading to the 9/ll attacks and Democrats get all giddy. But someone makes a made-for-TV docu-drama somewhat critical of the C|inton administration's handling of terrorism, and they get all offended. Who's stifling free speech now?
Can you imagine the uproar if Presiden+ Bush demanded that Michae| Moore change or pull his movie (even though it was full of misrepresntations)? It would've been not only riotous, but justified. Presidents (former or otherwise) shouldn't be allowed to demand changes to films they don't like -- regardless of their content. That, by definition, truly is censorship. And shouldn't be happening.
posted by That guy @ 5:20 PM
2 Comments:
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. While I thought Michael Moore's film was odious, it wasn't shown on basic cable. People had to want to see it enough to get off the couch, shell out $10 and watch the movie, whereas with this it's TV dinner fodder for free. If they want to put it out as a movie, fine, but to show it on ABC stations, not include any rebuttal by Clinton officials or even Lee Hamilton just seems a bit, well, biased. And on ABC rather than FOX! All we liberals have is CBS and Dan Rather's senile ass. (I suppose Rather's national guard story is a good rebuttal, but the docu-drama format of the 9/11 thing gives it even more credence. For instance, I'll doubt they'll periodically flash "docu" or "drama" on the screen to tell viewers which parts include artistic liberties and which come from the 9/11 commission).
I guess worst of all, it's sad to see 9/11 politicized in any way, especially by blaming one administration rather than the other. And yes, that was (one) of my huge disagreements with Michael Moore. I didn't put Disney at that fat bastards level though...
I see what you mean about the TV vs. movie thing. I actually thought about putting a disclaimer of some kind in there, but forgot.
On some level, I think Michael Moore's version is even worse because he portrayed it as straight fact. With the ABC thing, they're using Harvey Keitel for crying outloud. People are going to expect a little artistic lisence. Though I suppose the same could be said for Moore. Oh hell, I don't know.
The main point is, I agree with you that 9/11 shouldn't be politicized. It was a great symphony of fuckups by many different players. To blame one administration is asinine and counter-productive.
Though it is refreshing to see a liberal call out Michael Moore. Though to be honest, I don't really consider you that liberal in the conservative/liberal sense. You're far too upset about Lieberman losing to be that liberal.
Post a Comment
<< Home