Weird! I got here with no problem and I didn't "google" you either! Your blog came up right away.

Anyway, you are exactly right in this post. Freedom of speech seems to only be a priviledge that is reserved for the left, just like Freedom of Religion is reserved for everyone but Christians! I'm so tired of the BS going on in this country it's truly hard to maintain my composure and remain lady-like. Each day it seems to take more of an effort!

Gayle --

Glad you made it!

One thing I learned from years of living outside the U.S. (in The Socialist Republic of San Francisco) is that one thing liberals have in common with Islamofascists is Taqqiyah, and being of a Marxist turn of mind, a flair for propaganda.

Marxism hates Christianity because it can come between the individual and the state -- liberals use their propaganda machine to equate any official belief in G-d, despite that belief having played a major role in defining the U.S. back in the days when the country was born, with a violation of the Seperation of church & state.

The ultimate totalitarian goals of the left (any liberal will deny that any such ambitions exist, but there can be no other outcome if they get what they purport to want) are more similar to a caliphate than to any semblance of a free country. Those left leaning folks who have not thought this through may one day find themselves without the freedoms they've enjoyed under our present form of government and sit there in a daze, wondering in retrospect why they'd ever supported such a self destructive set of political dogmas.

All I would have to say to them would be, "Don't blame Desenex".

Please give us the errors of fact in Fahrenheit 9/11.

Then contrast those with the admitted (by Disney itself) use of invented dialogue & events portrayed in their version of 9/11.

Then answer why Disney saw fit to release the film to right-wing pundits & bloggers but did not release the film to left-wing sites.

Then justify Disney criticizing the 'liberal media' for questioning the acccuracy of the film prior to 'final cuts' while providing the 'unfinished' version to more sympathetic media outlets.

I'm waiting.

Totalitarianism & the discouragment of free speech seems a favorite pastime of the right rather than the left.

And the suggestion that those to the left of yourself support a caliphate is absurd.

Those on the left seem far better than you understand the nature of our freedoms.

And far more willing to exercise them.

Seth, I wonder if Aurthur recalls Sinclair Broadcasting and the film "Stolen Honor" (Oct '04) and the means used to stop that airing? Then, just as now, the threat of loss of an FCC license was used. The left has no moral high ground on this issue. The left protects "some" free speech; not "all" free speech.

Arthur --

Trying to balance between a heavy workload and the Blogosphere, my time is precious to me, so--

I'm not going to spend any time recapping that horrid pack of lies that so enamored Bush hating lefties to Michael Moore, instead I'll refer you here:

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

There was no hard-fought conservative campaign to censor Fahrenheit 9/11, whereas the left does its absolute best to get anything that casts them in a negative light removed -- by any means necessary. That is censorship, and it is not a tool of freedom of speech lovers, it's a tool of totalitarians and totalitarian wannabes.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either freedom of speech is for both sides, or there is no freedom of speech.

Those on the left seem far better than you understand the nature of our freedoms. And far more willing to exercise them.

Right, as long as those freedoms apply only to "those on the left".

Old Soldier --

I expect that Arthur either conveniently doesn't remember, or has a story within the confines of his tinfoil sombrero that somehow omits any coercive activity on the part of the left.

He lends new meaning to the word "predictable".

Old Soldier wrote:

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either freedom of speech is for both sides, or there is no freedom of speech.

Funny coming from you old one.

Ever eager to shut down the NY Times and the like. And always so eager, along with Matt, to resort to name calling with those with whom you disagree.

As Matt writes, predictable.

But thanks for avoiding my questions.

Lots of folks have dealt with Dave Kopel.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/7/18/173312/462

Arthur --

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either freedom of speech is for both sides, or there is no freedom of speech.

I wrote that, not Old Soldier, so you're off to a flying start.

Where does Matt come into this? It was also me who said you lend new meaning to the word "predictable". I don't suppose you read the "56 Deceits" column, but then, you are only interested in your usual unsupported contrariness.

As to a Daily Kos post, puhleeeze!

Arthur, YOU have GOT to be kidding here right????

No way do I beleive for ONE second that only the left believes in FREE SPEECH. They sure do- so long as that speech goes with the Kool Aid flavor of the month.

Attack the modern day hero of the left- Billy Boy Clinton- and all hell breaks out. Fact is, the show put Clinton into the true place he deserves- he was complacent with terrorism. Plain and simple. SO was the Bush administration, until 9-11.

The Right kicked up a fuss when a "docudrama" was made about Ronald Reagan- but no one ever threatened to pull the stations broadcast license! That's the ultimate form of killing ALL SPEECH. We're no friend of ABC, people on the right, BUT we will fight for their right to produce and show whatever programming they want. WHY? Because we believe in freedom of choice- a concept that you have probably never heard of. we are all free to watch something else anytime we want.

Raven --

I think Arthur reports to "Fearless Leader" from the Bullwinkle Show.

Seth,
The right believes in free speech? Man, I gotta
go tell the Dixie Chicks!

Seth-

Sorry for the incorrect attribution. I misread the line throws me occasionally. Still, peas in a pod you two.

I quoted the Daily Kos as ONE of many places to find rebuttal to the Kopel hatchet job. There are others.

As long as you're stuck in a steady stream of Washington Times and Newsmax cites you have no reason to complain about the Daily Kos.

Far more factual than either of the ones you seem to gravitate to.

But thanks for igonoring my questions of how Disney has promoted the film yet again.

You are nothing if not consistent.

Have a great weekend.

Pick up the current New Yorker for the 9/11 issue. Great reporting by Lawrence Wright on jihad.

Probably not apocalyptic enough for your tastes but a solid story nonetheless.

Enjoy.

BB --

Nobody told the Dixie Chicks they can't speak their minds or that they aren't entitled to their opinion.

What angered conservatives was the forum in which they chose to air their views of the President. Keep in mind that when a celebrity goes to another country, everything he/she says is, in its own way, representative to the people of that country of the average American. We're at war, and we don't need reverse ambassadors running around bolstering the morale of the enemy.

Even Madonna withheld the release of a video with an anti-Bush segment on it because she thought it inappropriate as we'd just gone to war.

If someone doesn't want to buy Dixie Chicks CDs, videos or concert tickets because they find the DCs offensive in that regard, well, the Dems don't have to watch the ABC miniseries, either.

Seth,
"Last night on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, Roger Cressey — a top counterterrorism official to Bush II and Clinton — blasted ABC’s docudrama “The Path to 9/11.” Cressy said “it’s amazing…how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong” and “then they got the big stuff wrong.” He added that a scene where the Clinton administration passes on a surefire opportunity to take out bin Laden is “something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It’s factually wrong. And that’s shameful.” is better
than the D-Chicks? I suppose you could say this
official is stupid and Clinton caused our record
deficit too. The right sees everyone and everything as an 'enemy'. Gotta go watch DeLay
on 'Dancing with the Stars' now.....

BB --

Dancing With The Stars, indeed! LOL!

“it’s amazing…how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong” and “then they got the big stuff wrong.”

It is a movie, not a documentary, and the network plans to declare this when they air it. The only difference between that and a liberal venue is that the GOP doesn't hammer a network or film company tooth and nail to make it go away before it's even shown. We respect freedom of speech, not censorship.

And BB --

Even if some dialogue or even the technical aspects of an event are off, the end result re the Clinton Administration vis a vis 9/11 remains the same. :-)

Seth,
Sure, Bob Dole would have nabbed him in no time!
Let's face it, there is blame enough to go around
and if a fiction movie makes you happy, don't let
me spoil your fun. Which part does Keiffer play?

BB --

If Bubba'd had a Jack Bauer type on the payroll, he'd have tried to use him as an enforcer in his private affairs, which I'm sure would have been a full time job, lots of O.T.

The only things the 1990s POTUS will be remembered for are Frenchness in the face of the enemy and punching notches on the taxpayer's dime, assuming revisionist history doesn't reconstruct him as the greatest President that ever lived.

So, you're saying that Fahrenheit 9/11 was a supremely accurate, fair and balanced account, then. Every fact double checked for authenticity and reported with homogeneously neutral, non-partisan integrity.

Dancing With The Stars, LOL.

Seth,
I can't pass judgement on Farenheit 9/11, I
haven't seen it, nor the Euro version 'Centigrade 9/11'. My last outing to
a movie theatre involved Stewart Granger in 'King Solomon's Mines'. I would just note that in physiognomy and style, Micheal Moore is a Karl Rove wannabee. :-)

The last Stewart Granger offering I saw was opposite Richard Burton, Richard Harris, Roger Moore and Hardy Kruger in an outstanding and seemingly unobtainable (now) 1970s film called The Wild Geese.

Seth,
You think all the hype is to increase the ratings? Its probably another dud. Haven't seen
a decent miniseries since they did "Once An Eagle". BTW, the president is on during that
timeframe...oh what's a liberal to do? I've seen
as many episodes of 'Extreme Elimation' as I can
take!!

BB --

No, this is purely an attempt at censorship, which if anything leads me to believe that there's more truth here than fiction -- why else would the Clinton bunch be so desperate to keep it off the air?

Here is something I've learned about dealing with liberals: They never have any tangibly defensible justification for anything they engender, so rather than be forced into a position where they will have to justify themselves, they suppress, ignore or spin the truth. This fight against the airing of the miniseries is a perfect example.

They obviously have something to hide.

Seth,
You likely fondly recall when CBS yanked their Reagan docudrama and the GOP chair stated:
"Misleading a smaller audience of viewers is not a noble response to the legitimate concerns raised about this program," said Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) yesterday.....yesterday in OS's post..
'The left protects "some" free speech; not "all" free speech.' Am I to assume you criticized the
whiners who protested the Reagan film. I'm sure
you did, otherwise you would be hypocritical...A
term you like to apply to folks with whom you disagree.

BB --

The Republicans may have moaned, but they didn't try to employ censorship tactics through official channels. There are limits that the left doesn't recognize.

Pick up the current New Yorker for the 9/11 issue. Great reporting by Lawrence Wright on jihad

I heard him talk about his book "The Looming Tower" on Dennis Prager. It was a good interview. Hugh Hewitt blogged it today and is rivetted to the book.

As for the Fahrenheit 9/11 truthiness claims...you have got to be kiddin'?! I saw that crapumentary and you cannot seriously believe it is anything short of lies, deceits, and distortions, can you?

Wordsmith --

Thank you, it's great to have corroboration of my own opinion of that utterly %$*&%*##@ piece of lefty propaganda.

It earned Comrade Mikel Mooreochumpskovich wide acclaim beneath a million tinfoil hats, seats on the dais with treasonous former Presidents and enough grocery money to probably pass the 350 lb mark, LOL. I only hope he spent a couple of bucks of his ill gotten gains on deodorant.

I'll grab a copy of the New Yorker on Monday and read Wright.

I saw the Hugh Hewitt post on The Looming Tower, and will probably buy the book, assuming that the Dems haven't used the 9th Circus to take it off the market by then. :-)

Seth,
I'm afraid that in the interest of fairness, ABC
will have to air Farenheit 9/11 as a miniseries the following week. Everyone will be happy and we can get back to 'Extreme Makover' and 'Wife Swap' (sigh)

"Extreme Makeover?" "Wife Swap!?" ROTFLMAO!!!!

BB --

You're killing me! There's a show called "Wife Swap?"

My friend, if you're going to keep watching TV, you really, REALLY need to get cable or DirecTV!

Dancing With Wife Swappers, LOL!

Seth wrote:

It earned Comrade Mikel Mooreochumpskovich wide acclaim beneath a million tinfoil hats, seats on the dais with treasonous former Presidents and enough grocery money to probably pass the 350 lb mark, LOL. I only hope he spent a couple of bucks of his ill gotten gains on deodorant.

When you turn 21 Seth the fatguy jokes will seem a lot less funny.

Arthur --

I'm 51, and have had a tendency to put on weight myself for some years, but I keep it mostly in check via exercise. I do not expect to ever blow up like the blimp your idol, Michael Moore, did -- assuming he was ever in any kind of decent shape to begin with. He is a pig.

I notice you didn't take umbrage with anything else in that paragraph, instead zeroing in on the weight thing... Is that a sore spot? Do you and Moore cast the same shadow?

Not at all. I'm an avid cyclist and ride fifty mile circuits a couple of times a week.

Fatguy humor is pretty sophmoric. That's all. Appeals to the young and the simple.

Arthur --

I have a couple of friends who are old geezers and in the shape of active people a quarter of their ages, who rarely fail to utter fat jokes when they encounter someone of major obesity, and I can assure that they, like you, don't exactly put the middle "o" in sophomoric. :-)

When in doubt criticize typos.

Well done Seth.

I wrote young and simple.

Needn't be both though. Either applies.

Your geezer friends strike me as quite simple to make fatguy jokes at their age.

Simple isn't a function of age.

It's a symptom of a tiny mind.

Arthur --

My geezer friends are anything but simple.

You're just PC.

Your geezer friends are simple. Trust me.

Labelling something 'PC' a ruse by rightwingers to misbehave.

It is simply rude to make fun of a persons appearance.

My parents taught me that and I would guess your grandparents imparted the same lesson to you.