Clintonistas? Sign Me Up

[filkertom]

At least they're now being fucking blatant about the agenda. Note that this is not in any opinion section; it's labeled as "ABC News Home > U.S."

As Jerry said in comments over at AmericaBlog, "This isn't about defending the honor of Bill Clinton, it's about defending the TRUTH."

Comments

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Call me pessimistic, but...

I've got a bad feeling that by trying to stop ABC from airing this, we're playing right into the hands of the administration and their claims that those who oppose them are equivalent to "Nazi sympathizers".

Maybe what we should have done is let them air it and sue the shit out of them afterwards!

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I know what you mean, but I genuinely don't think so. As I saw in comments on another blog the other day, the big-ass lie above the fold on Page A1 is often corrected at the bottom of Page C7.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

I had the same concerns.

But you can't get the toothpaste back in the tube after you jump on it, and unfortunately, I am forced to consider the average American viewer to be the Lowest Common Denominator.

Look at how many e-mail forwards you get from people: Bill Gates will give you a dollar for every name on this forward list, a free giftcard from Outback, women in Chicago dying from the bite of the deadly gluteus arachnis spider...for that matter, how many people remember that "Everybody's Free To Wear Sunscreen" speech, but don't realize Kurt Vonnegut had crap to do with it? On a more local level, how about an article the day after a horrific crash that says, "Police believe alcohol was a factor?" A crash like that will always be "that drunk," no matter that the police discover a week later it wasn't alcohol-related at all. Or more sinister, widespread things: Bill Clinton had Vince Foster killed, Planned Parenthood makes money off abortions, George Bush went to college...I could keep going on and on.

Sadly, once something is "news" in America, the facts are of little consequence.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

That Madeline Albright. What a troublemaker. /eyeroll

Meanwhile, some conservative bloggers, who are not the least bit disturbed that the film may suggest the Clinton administration was weak on national security, have praised the film.

Nevermind that the Department of Homeland Security was planned by the Clinton Administration and handed to the Bushies on Clinton's way out the door, and then tossed in a pile 'cause it was a Clinton plan, and Rumsfeld wouldn't give up 1% of his budget to fund it. Who cares if Clinton's people told them, "Look, Bin Laden's a problem. You need to concentrate on him." There were queers to conquer!

And this time it is liberals — not conservatives — who are complaining about reputed Hollywood bias.


ABC does not equal Hollywood. Gods, I think ABC is actually getting a boner over all this.

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

Jaysus, at this rate Britain could just annoyance that we're taking over again... and most of the American public would just go Yay!

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

Well, we do love those accents...

[porsupah.livejournal.com]

Some interesting roots (http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001491.php) of the project appear to be emerging. One wonders where the $40m or so came from, given ABC's going to be showing it (for now) without commercials. (And BBC Two as well, for shame)

[admnaismith.livejournal.com]

Nope. Once the marching morons have seen it on television, it's all over.

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

As my father the journalist is fond of remarking, "Where is this damn Liberal Media I hear so much about?"

[beldar.livejournal.com]

Anyone besides me think it was a tad odd that ABC was screaming "don't judge, we're not finished editing it yet"?

Nobody has a project in the cutting room this close to airtime unless something is majorly funked up. Obviously, the Disneyistas realized they've screwed up and are in heavy recut mode in an attempt at damage control.

What puzzles me is that, according to ultraconservatives who are backing this movie, ABC has in the past been part of the evil elitist liberal media, which would never have touched this project with a 100 foot pole. How did this get past all the leftists who supposedly control the major networks?

[peteralway.livejournal.com]

Is the opposite of a Clintonista a Buscist?

Cover Your Mouse

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Well, given that they sent out several hundred review copies -- including many to right-wing bloggers, and none to left-wing types -- I suspect it was a whole lot less "not finished" than they want us to think.

Re: Cover Your Mouse

[arucartoonguy.livejournal.com]

Wasn't the "Don't judge it, we're still editing" excuse used for that Ronald Reagan movie which got pulled off off broadcast TV and on to Showtime? Interesting turnaround for the Republican outrage, or lack of same, this time.

Plus no one I've heard of is saying "Don't show it", they're just wanting the lies and made-up stuff edited to show the truth rather than truthiness.

(Thanks for the perfect phrase goes to Stephen Colbert...)

[vixyish.livejournal.com]

That's what I keep wondering, too.

I was watching an episode of West Wing the other day, wherein the reporters were just going mad and tearing the pressroom ruthlessly apart with question after question about something or other the White House did, and I couldn't help but wonder... where did our rabid, ruthlessly-questioning media go?

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

No, a Fascist. They just don't want to admit it.

[admnaismith.livejournal.com]

Hey, you're being unfair to fascists.

Seriously.

Fascists are competent. They make the trains run on time. Can you imagine the Bush League even trying to make the trains run on time? Their vested interest is in making Amtrak suck as much as possible so that they can dismantle it.

Re: Cover Your Mouse

[admnaismith.livejournal.com]

Forget editing things out. I'd settle for having it clearly labeled as a work of fiction. Like Oliver Stone's JFK and Nixon movies. They played games with the truth too, but they didn't claim to be historical documentary, so it was all right.

Re: Cover Your Mouse

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking about the Reagan movie, actually. A few right-wing pundits have made the observation that The Left is now in the position they were in when they called for the pulling of that film.

Naturally, the comparison makes me uneasy.

But as I recall, no one claimed the film was inaccurate. Just that it portrayed Saint Ronnie in a negative light.

And that's the crucial difference. They fought to Make Reagan Look Good. We're fighting to Make the Truth Known.

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

Actually, I know where the Liberal Media is.

It's in Hollywood, making movies.

See, someone somewhere remembered that "media" is actually a plural -- "medium" is the singular -- and like it or not, Hollywood films tend to have a vaguely leftist slant.

Then, too, a few people decided that "Murphy Brown" really was a journalist.

But by and large, the Liberal Media exists in people's minds. No, really. A loathesome right-wing blogger it is my unfortunate lot to be acquainted with was once asked for evidence of the Liberal Media he's been known to denounce.

His evidence: a few polls showing that people THINK the media is liberal, and a poll claiming that a majority of journalists described themselves as liberal (though a majority of publishers described themselves as conservative).

Now, who was it who commented on repeating a lie often enough...

Re: Cover Your Mouse

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Not good enough. Those movies were shown in the theaters; you had to pay to see 'em. This is going to be shown on free TV -- with no commercials, no less. And people will buy the most insane shit if it looks authentic enough on TV.

oh yeah!

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

Yes, you're right, I remember that was used by apologists about the Italians before WWII.

[realinterrobang.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's my concern too. When confronted with the question, "Who are you going to believe, me or your lyin' eyes?" if the "me" in question is the tv, a lot of people will believe the tv. As a working historian (I sort of fell into the gig; it's not my academic field, but I'm getting paid for it), the whole "making shit up" angle bothers me, as well.

I'm likely to get opprobrium from people here for saying so, but I really didn't like Clinton that much; he was too far to the right for me. I'd still take Clinton over Bush the Younger any day, but Clinton did any number of things that pissed me off to no end, so I'm not just making these remarks because I'm some kind of Democratic partisan. (I'm also Canadian, so I can't even vote in your elections.)

[bschilli.livejournal.com]

Except that the Fascists didn't make the trains run on time.

Ben