Stolen Honor

“Surprised to see no squabble about "stolen honor". Are you guys sleeping, or did I miss a thread about it?”

“that would be the ""Unfair" bleat Dems" thread.”

“It's a mis-use of the public airways for propaganda purposes.

Why don't these right-wingers put it in theaters where people can pay to see it?”

“I can change threads if you like. I watched Hardball last night with Chris Matthews, and Scarborough was on too.

They were saying that the Stolen Honor is completely wrong on two counts:

1) Vietnam protestors did NOT extend the war.

2) The 'famous' interviews were chopped up, and edited from their original context completely.”

“Sounds like Farenheit 9/11.”

“I knew you were going to say that, Bison.

:)”

“too much to do today, can't post too much, gotta take the path of least resistance :)”

“In the debate, Dick Cheney lambasted John Edwards for his spotty attendance record in the Senate:

Cheney: "Now, in my capacity as Vice President, I am the president of the Senate and the presiding officer. I’m up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they’re in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."

As a gazillion bloggers instantly pointed out:



National Prayer Breakfast, February 1, 2001

Cheney: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world …"

Evidently, the old codger has grown senile. Could it be time to put him out to pasture?”

“Apparently, Cheney can’t remember where he spends his Tuesdays either. Of the 127 Tuesdays on which the Senate was in session, he was present for only two.

I suppose this might come down to a matter of semantics. As a former president might have remarked, “It all depends on what the meaning of ‘most’ is.””

“Bison: Ya, me too.. just thought I'd check in and say hi.”

“You're correct TownDawg, Vietnam protesters did not extend the war.

If anything protesters raised awareness and shortened a war that could have continued indefinitely.

They were very much like those of us who oppose this un-necessary war.

WE are moms and dads and families who don't want to see our sons and daughters killed, mangled or turned into killers.

WE are people who care about justice.

Then, as now, WE were lied to about the need to go to war.

Then, as now, WE were told that to criticize our government at a time of war is at best inappropriate and at worst, treason.”

“I saw the head of the media company and some other guy square off on the Jim Lear News Hour. The Media guy made some good points. First, everyone is getting all worked up about something no one has even seen yet. Second they are being accused of not offering equal time which is not true because they offered Kerry to come on and take all the time he wants to discuss the documentary. I really don’t see this as anything different than the 520 ads only longer. Hell, it's no worse than some of the 60 Minute stories they've ran to smear the pres.

Aren’t liberals for free speech?”

“It's not about free speech, it's about fairness in braodcasting on the public airways.

Corporatism; a merging of state and corporate power.”

“Mark, get real Dan Rather and CBS do a hatchet jobbased on forged documents. The documents that they were based on were forged. Dan Rather knew that (or damn well should have, he sure was willing to put his name on it). The producers knew that they were false. It's either sloppy beyond belief, or intentional. It was a Kerry Campaign hit piece dressed up as a documentary. Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

The Mark Halprin memo states that ABC needs to hit Bush hard and give Kerry a pass. Sounds like a Kerry campaign worker to me.

Those go by and not a peep out of you. Both are using your airwaves for Partisan political purposes. Both are National networks (appearantly wholly owned by the DNC). And you're complaining about Sinclair and his 60 some stations.”

““It's not about free speech, it's about fairness in braodcasting on the public airways."

Giving Kerry unlimited time to give his side isn't fair? And as noprob points out, sense when are you concerned with both sides of any issue having equal time?”

“Hey Nig. I thought you were of the opinion that wasting time on this thirty year old stuff was fruitless in this race. Am I wrong aboyut that?”

“And this Sinclair ass hole says that it's news. What a #&%!$in'g joke!”

““Hey Nig. I thought you were of the opinion that wasting time on this thirty year old stuff was fruitless in this race. Am I wrong aboyut that?”

When did I say that? I’ve always been of the mind that if Kerry wants to walk around calling himself a war hero and use that as part of his platform while totally ignoring his Senate record, then fine, let’s look at his service record. Even if I was against drudging up his service record I would NEVER stand in anyone else’s way of doing so. Same goes for Bush’s record.”

“If I'm wrong, then sorry. Thought you were one of those that feel that all that stuff about Vietnam wasn't pertinent, whether it be Kerry's service or Bush's. Not a big point either way, anyway...”

“Sinclair has donated 100,000 to the Bush campaign. 97% of all of their political contributions have gone to Republicans. No bias there, huh?
To compare this to Farenheit 9/11 doesn't wash. That was a movie that you had to pay money to go see in a theatre. This piece is being transmitted over the public airwaves.
In reality, If they give Kerry, or one of his representatives the power to interrupt the program and refute the points as they come up, I would think that would be fair.”

“I wasn't talking about F911. I try never to talk about it. It's trash, why should I spend my time on it.

I was comparing Stolen Honor to CBS/Rather and ABC/Halprin, which seems like an apples to apples comparison which you lemmings seem perfectly happy to ignore.

Sinclair donated 100,000, so what, how much has the movingon.org guy spent on Kerry? Of course there is bias! It's a political campaign. You're biased, I'm biased. I don't care how much somebody donates to a campaign (or pays to do it as a surogate). I do have a problem taking you serious when you ignore something your guy does (or is done on his behalf) then have a fit over the other one doing it.”

“Last time I looked there were several choices to make with regard to TV, the precious airwaves.

You can switch to another channel, several if you happen to have either cable or satelite delivery.

You can switch the damned thing off and again you have lots of choices on how to spend your time.

Read a book. This will do much more to improve your mind than most of the stuff on TV.

Go for a walk, look on it as backpack training.

Sinclair paid a pile of money to lease those particular airwaves. This is a good thing as it puts money in the public coffers which otherwise we would have to make up with additional taxes. I am happy that my taxes are a little less because someone leased some airwaves.

The public has the ability to turn the message off, this is a free society no one is forced to watch.

If no-one watches, sinclair will lose advertizing money, but that should be his choice in a free society. He paid the lease, let him use it. If you make it too restrictive he could decide not to lease airwaves and our taxes will have to increase to make up the difference.

Oops - now I get it, I am talking to Socialists who want taxes increased, my bad.”

“The CBS story on Bush was a mess, but it was a legitimate story. CBS was intentionally fed bogus documents. At least they eventually admitted their mistake.

Whether the documents were false or not is besides the point. The story of Bush's lack of service in the National Guard, his AWOL status remains true. The focus was changed to CBS.

This is akin to the ABC News story about Food Lion and their bleaching of old meat. ABC got slammed for dishonestly planting an undercover camera. What was forgotten in the uproar was the fact that Food Lion was selling old meat illegally.

Bush was AWOL. Period. CBS was set up.

In regards to the Stolen Honor Video...it's an old story about the opinions of some very bitter vets. They are free to have their opinions. Kerry had the guts to publically admit that the Vietnam War was wrong and that atrocities were committed by some not all. His testimony angered some(a lot)people. That was unavoidable.

It's an old story but it seems that Sinclair can broadcast it if they want. I don't see the big harm. The attention being paid to it is what's damaging. The bleating about Fahrenheit 9-11 was useless and so is this. I understand about the public airwaves and all that, but that argument won't wash...nothing will change unless we get Kerry elected.

This video will play to W's base and few others. Most folks who see it will see it as it is.....some aging bitter vets enraged by someone who dared to point out that their war a mistake.

I trust that most people already see that John Kerry served in combat in Vietnam and Bush stayed home hiding in the "champagne brigade" partying and playing soldier.”

“Thanks JO.. Your words were evenly balanced. I didn't realize what a firestorm this thread would generate -- but obviously it's a divided issue among us.

I'm sure I'll watch it. I watched F911 and loved it. I'm all for free speech. I'm also for "truth and the American way" also. All I was trying to say on my first posts to this thread, that even Republicans were trashing the film, saying it was contrived at best.

Yeah I'm a Kerry supporter. Let's hope Stolen Honor is credible enough to give me pause.”

“By the way, did you hear that BS claim that Edwards made yesterday or the day before? gEez.. talk about putting his foot in his mouth!”

“JO, so CBS story was a legitimate story? They were fed bogus documents? I agree they probably were fed bogus documents. But their researcher told them the doc. were bogus and they decided that since the docs said what the CBS producers wanted to be true they should do the store anyway. If that is your idea of a legitimate news story, it's no wonder you feel Kerry is the right man to be president.

"Bush was AWOL. Period. CBS was set up"

A. CBS let themselves be set up. Who set them up? My guess is that Terry McAllif (sp?) knows the answer to that. Please note I didn't say he did it. I just think he knows a lot about it.

B. The only evidence that Bush was AWOL is the CBS documents and your word.
last edited: 10/13/04 10:08:15 AM”

““By the way, did you hear that BS claim that Edwards made yesterday or the day before? gEez.. talk about putting his foot in his mouth!”

No, what was it?”

“I don't have the exact quote.. but went something like this:

"We will cure Parkinson's, we will cure Muscular Dystrophy.. etc.. etc.. People who have injuries like Christopher Reeves will get up and walk!"

I don't have it exact, but basically promised "GOD power" (if Kerry was elected), and Bush is the devil holding all the stem cell research back.”

“Yikes! That's right up there with "Read my lips...NO NEW TAXES!". LOL!”

“yeah.. It was a crucial mistake I think. I think he forgot he wasn't playing to a bunch of weepy-eyed jurors.”

“To be fair to the guy I myself have to say that some crazy chit gets said on the campaign trail. Just think about how many speeches these guys give in a week’s time. I’d be a blithering idiot by Tuesday afternoon and would be reciting the latest issue of Archie comics out of shear exhaustion and mental breakdown. LOL!”

“NoProb

Karl Rove. Karl Rove bugged his own candidate's (Gov. Bill Clements-Texas)office back in the 80s to distract attention during a campaign.

Nobody has doubted the contents of those bogus documents, just their authenticity.
Again, Bush was AWOL.

Kerry has 2 pieces of shrapnel deep in his thigh. Bush got high.

Again, let the bitter vets vent their venom.
I've seen parts of this video and they look stupid and petty, blaming Kerry for a war that went bad.”

“"Bush has called Rove a close friend and confidant, and a man with good judgment. Almost a quarter of all the money Bush's presidential exploratory committee spent from January to the end of March, 1999, went to Rove's consulting firm ($220,228)."”

“"The Mark Halprin memo states that ABC needs to hit Bush hard and give Kerry a pass."
- NoProb
8:54:34 AM


Is that really what the memo says or is that what Drudge/Hannity/et al told you it says?


Here is the text as reported by Drudge:

It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave

I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.

The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.

Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.

We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.

I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.


I think what he is saying is that if Bush tells 20 substantive lies and Kerry tells 2 rather minor ones, they have a duty to report it just that way - not claim (as they often do) that "Both Candidates Get Facts Wrong" or something to that effect. That formula automatically favors the bigger liar and it is quite obvious to most people who the bigger liar is. I can understand why the right is upset by Halperin calling on journalists to actually do their job, but he's right, IMO.
last edited: 10/13/04 12:07:36 PM”

“I can see why you say that, since it seems to be saying that if Bush says something about Kerry it is by definition a major distortion and we must report it that way, however if Kerry says something it is at worst a minor distortion and we will not give it to much attention.

I'm sure you don't read it that way. I disagree.”

“"We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that."”

“The question I ask is do I trust the major media outlets to be the sole judge of what ‘facts’ warrant attention? I think not. It’s all conjecture.”

“Anti-Kerry Film Won't Be Aired

Under mounting political, legal and financial pressure, Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. yesterday backed away from its plan to carry a film attacking John F. Kerry's Vietnam War record, saying it would air only portions of the movie in an hour-long special scheduled for Friday.
[...]
Sinclair said it will produce "A POW Story: Politics, Pressure and the Media," hosted by Jeff Barnd, an anchor at Sinclair's WBFF in Baltimore, using footage from "Stolen Honor" and other political documentaries while examining allegations of media bias. The company now says that it never intended to air "Stolen Honor" in its entirety, although Sinclair commentator and vice president Mark Hyman had told The Washington Post that the movie would air unless the Massachusetts senator agreed to an interview, in which case only portions might run.
[...]
Sinclair's stock has dropped more than 15 percent since the controversy erupted 10 days ago. Alan G. Hevesi, the Democratic comptroller of New York whose state pension fund holds 257,000 shares of Sinclair, questioned in a letter to the company yesterday whether airing the movie would further depress the shares.

The Sinclair announcement came hours after Deborah Rappaport, a major Democratic donor with her husband, Andy, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, said they had offered to buy one hour on Sinclair stations. This would finance a 42-minute version of a pro-Kerry documentary, "Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry," by George Butler. Rappaport said she was "deeply, deeply outraged" by Sinclair's action and was offering $1 million more than the company's usual ad rate in response.
[...]”

“Censorship.

This doesnt seem to get the same nazi labeling that was used when Fahrenheit 911 was suppressed by the movie people, but it is the same.

Why should Democrats fund stations that show material they do not agree with.
Why should Sinclair air material he does not agree with.

Both sides can argue fiscal reponsibility and public trust. Sinclair turned down $1M that the (some of) shareholders would like, but The Democratic comptroller of New York Pension fund is also leveraging the pensions of Republicans in New York which they probably do not agree with.

Rappaport is "outraged" because ... gosh ... she has found an incorruptible person who will not roll over for her husband's money.

Not that Sinclair is really incorruptible but he will not sit up and beg because Rich B*tch flaps a wad of cash.

Could go off on a tangent here and say, I would bet that the late Senator John Heinz would probably not approve of the money he made being used by his widow to elect the person furtherest from his politcal views as president.”

“Censorship? What a load of crap. Their stock was falling....investors were nervous and fulfilling their responsibility to their shareholders.

Fahrenheit 9-11 probably made money. This propaganda couldn't stand on it's own. It's a waste of Sinclair stochholders money.”

“and fahrenheit is not propaganda

Good going JO”

“Thanks manuka!

I never said it wasn't, but Fahrenheit 9-11 certainly IS propaganda. It's full of inaccuracies and embellishment of facts, but the basic premise is accurate.

This Stolen Honor Documentary is the gripes of some very bitter vets. Their war went bad and they are blaming it on some one who told the truth about it.”

“When people were upset about f911, it was censorship (just ask M.Moore). But this isn't?

Surely you don't really believe that!”

“"Could go off on a tangent here and say, I would bet that the late Senator John Heinz would probably not approve of the money he made being used by his widow to elect the person furtherest from his politcal views as president.”
manuka
12:38:17 PM
10/20/04

I wonder if he'd approve of Kerry boffing the crap out of Teresa?
...and its not like he started the company, btw.”

“I’ve never had my honor stolen but my Uncle Jimmy did steal my innocence.”

“"I never said it wasn't, but Fahrenheit 9-11 certainly IS propaganda. It's full of inaccuracies and embellishment of facts, but the basic premise is accurate."

I completely reject the idea that the basic premise is accurate.

I believe that those very bitter vets have a right to be bitter and have a right to express their gripes, as much as any one else.

I guess freedom of speech only works if you are a democrat, huh.”

“Well, reject the premise all you want, but enough people laid their money down and watched it....in a theater. Free speech? Let these vets put this thing in a theater and see if people want to pay to see it.”

“I don't have a problem with people putting their money down to see F/911. But given all the free Campaign time that Kerry is getting from CNN and the networks, I don't see why anyone should care about Sinclair.

Every time a pro-Kerry book or anti-Bush book comes out it's all over the networks, GMA, 60 minutes, you name it. The only way you get any of the news that isn't favorable to Kerry is to watch Fox or listen to radio. But at least there is no bias on the networks.”