Big Dog on MSNBC: "I don't want any lies in there parading as the truth"

[Human Torch]

Just saw a very brief snipped of an interview with the DAWG...talking about "the movie"...

And you know what? He's pissed off, and rightly so, but he remains calm and articulate and focused.

He doesn't wave his arms in the air and howl like a monkey and squint and smirk and stutter. He makes his position clear without theatrics or spoiled-child temper tantrums.

He's...oh hell, what's the word I'm looking for? "Presidential." YEAH, THAT'S it.



:patriot:

[Straight Shooter]

1. Bill Clinton has never appeared rattled in public.

See, Bill is a man. A man. Little Boots is a boy, just a boy.

Therein lies the difference, and all the emperor's clothes won't cover that fact.

[Virginia Dare]

5. Hence why this whole thing could blow up in their faces...

whoever is behind this garbage. Putting Bill Clinton in the spotlight again will not enhance the chimp's image a bit.

When people start comparing and contrasting, the differences will be stark.

[liberal N proud]

2. He is more of a man than the entire bu$h regime combined

He is poised and very professional, unlike the morons who have this nation around the neck today.

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

3. I caught that!

A lousy, hand-held camera shot, not lengthy, but he made his point. He was also somewhat dismissive of the whole furor, as if it's beneath him to engage the subject with his trademark incisive intellectual ferocity.

What he's really saying? "Talk to my lawyers."

What a great guy!

[Imagevision]

4. Clinton has made ABC/Disney to drop their pencils...

[pat_k]

6. Yada Yada -- Let's see a 500 Million Dollar Lawsuit. . .

. . .we don't need another impotent war of words.

Time to get serious and hold them accountable for their actions by going after the only thing that matters to them -- Dollars.

$500 Million is a nice round number. It's a figure worthy of notice, and is in line with quarterly profits reported by Disney media.

And, whatever is awarded could fund organizations (or even a new network) dedicated to promoting truth in media/exposing their lies and propaganda.

Somebody in the Disney media group decided from the beginning to produce a smear of Dems. Otherwise why would you hire a script writer Limbaugh's "friend" Cyrus Nowrasteh? A self-described conservative (although he tries to escape the shame now associated with Bush and the Republican label by calling himself more of a liberatarian).

Why would you screen it for Limbaugh, Human Events, and other right-wing propagandists, but refuse to screen it for Clinton, et al.

[Tellurian]

8. $500 million might be too conservative a figure...

inclusive of (just) Disney. What about abc tv..andtheir shareholders?
What about the Christian Church (representing the Christian majority) producer who superimposed events that never happened..hmm.

Drain their bank accounts until their left sniveling and crying to please make it stop!

p.s.

donate some of the funds to the Firefighters who are now suffering with lung disease because of their rescue efforts...and any one in need of the 9/11 widows/widowers!

Just a thought!

[pat_k]

9. The Bigger the Better! (Punative damages for harm to the Nation)

The damages aren't just to Clinton et al personally.

Making up Presidential actions, and claiming those actions are based on a report produced by a Goverenment commission, is damaging to us as citizens.

As a member of the 911 Commission, Kean was an agent of the government. You could argue that his service as a consultant on a film intended to depict the findings of his commission's report is an extention of his role as an agent of the government -- and the product of his service is therefore a "public record." A public record that includes fictions and libelous portrayals of executive actions of a former administration is damaging to the public interest. . .

I'n not a lawyer, but when damages are real, ways can be found to seek redress in court. Presenting lies about the official actions of our government to the public with an official government stamp of approval damages the public interest.

[Tellurian]

12. Why Not?

"as an agent of the government -- and the product of his service is therefore a "public record." A public record that includes fictions and libelous portrayals of executive actions of a former administration is damaging to the public interest. . .

And if this goes to trial, naturally it would be incumbent on the Plaintiffs to follow the chain of people from whence the order came to change history and depict it in a way contrary to actual events. Which,in effect could uncover a whole new subset of "agents of the government" with a vested interest in
the outcome of the film, if one were able to ascertain their motivations. Certainly, theorys could be floated while witnesses are under cross examination. (until someone crackes!)

Too much fun, this!

p.s.

might I be so bold as to change one word in the last line of your tagline?

Change the word "should" to MUST? <g> I'll volunteer to lobby the change..

[OzarkDem]

10. And a nice big fine from the FCC

Let's say a cool $1 million should do the trick.

[glitch]

7. Big Dawg is hereby redeemed in my eyes

for all that nasty friendliness toward the evil Poppy. ;)

[mucifer]

11. I'm still angry about nafta and cafta and some other slimy things he

did like 3 strike and welfare reform.

Yeah he's no george bush and I would vote for him in a second to get bush out of office. But, he has done his share of damage to our nation, too. I personally don't think we should cannonize him.

But, it is nice to hear a president with an actual brain in his head.

[IndianaGreen]

13. Al Gore and Harvey Keitel have also assailed this docu-fiction!

Clinton, Other Democrats Assail ABC Docudrama 'Path to 9/11'

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 9, 2006; Page A04

Democrats -- joined yesterday by former vice president Al Gore -- have mounted a campaign against the film, which depicts Clinton administration officials as undermining attempts to capture or kill bin Laden. Actor Harvey Keitel, who plays an FBI agent in the film, has joined the critics, telling CNN's "Showbiz Tonight" that he has had arguments with the filmmakers over elements that were "wrong."

"You can't put these things together, compress them and then distort the reality. . . . You cannot cross the line from a conflation of events to a distortion of the event," Keitel said. "Where we have distorted something, we made a mistake, and it should be corrected."

In another salvo, nine prominent historians -- including Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., Sean Wilentz and Michael Kazin -- released a letter urging the film's cancellation. Calling ABC's explanation that the movie will be identified as a dramatization "disingenuous and dangerous," they said: "A responsible broadcast network should have nothing to do with the falsification of history, except to expose it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/08/AR2006090801576.html?sub=AR