I understand why we can't compare this directly to F 9/11 and forget the whole Reagan thing. You should have an ethical responsibility for calling something a documentary. Once doing so, especially political it should be true. You can spin it how you want, but the general idea and quotes ...
| |||||||
|
| Register to Post a Reply |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| | #21 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| I understand why we can't compare this directly to F 9/11 and forget the whole Reagan thing. You should have an ethical responsibility for calling something a documentary. Once doing so, especially political it should be true. You can spin it how you want, but the general idea and quotes should be true. Michael Moore was wrong for twisting people's words and using editing trickery... and so is this documentary. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #22 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
| Oh please, why should we forget the whole Reagan thing? It's exactly the same! Look at how conservatives were clammoring over their previous cowboy hero President to be accurately portrayed in some miniseries.. but Clinton doesn't deserve the same level of respect? We're at WAR! War demands seriousness, and this isn't serious! So according to that Republican standard, we can't have any funny business about a past President not being portrayed accurately in a television program. Sorry. Maybe when the war on terrorism is over. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #23 | ||||
| Banned - Self Imposed Progressive Philadelphia, PA ![]() ![]()
| MM was an idiot because he could have done just an effecitve job without making edits, but he did so anyway He is no friend of the democratic party, only certain members...and what can I say, we're a big party...the GOP has Ann Coulter | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #24 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| Originally Posted by motivez I understand it's similar to the whole Reagan thing and it makes the point well. But that's kinda old. F 9/11 suits the bill and it's fairly recent.
I didn't mean to scrap the whole Reagan argument. I'm just saying you can look at F 9/11 and the reaction and be done with it right there. The fact that we have to go back decades to make a point just doesn't seem to make sense. It's still a valid comparison. I just have no idea why such extreme measures need to be taken. This is another bullshit political documentary that cares more about deceit than integrity. It's wrong no matter which party it's in favor of. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #25 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
| I'm sorry, but the fact that it was 3 years ago instead of 2 hardly makes it irrelevent. Decades? What are you talking about? ![]() Those comments were made in 2003 about the miniseries airing on CBS about Reagan... | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #26 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| |||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #27 | ||||
| helluo librorum The Lab Moderator Humanist Chicago Suburbs ![]() ![]()
| Motivez laying the quotes down. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| Register to Post a Reply |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| documentary, abc, calls, news, fox |
| ||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| |
| vBulletin 3.7.4 -- Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. | Custom Artwork and Theme (TM) 2006, Liberty Lounge |