The Babe Theory Of Political Movements.
Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM
Iran's Sham Election In Houston.
June 20, 2005 5:36 AM
Yes, Kanye, Bush Does Care.
Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM
Health Care vs. Wealth Care.
Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM
Americans Voting With Their Feet.
Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM
Idea Majorities Matter.
May 12, 2006 6:15 PM
Twilight Zone Economics.
Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM
The "Shrinking" Middle Class.
Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM
From Ashes, GOP Opportunities.
Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM
Battle Between Entitlements & Pork.
Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM
Let Economic Freedom Reign.
Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM
Biggest Health Care Moment In Decades.
July 25, 2007 4:32 PM
Unions Antithetical to Liberty.
May 28, 2008 11:12 PM
Right To Work States Rock.
June 9, 2008 12:25 PM
Social Security Reform Thursday.
March 13, 2008
Caption Contest: Enter Today!
Due: July 29, 2008
The Carnival Of Classiness.
Mar. 14, 2006
Quotational Therapy: Obama.
Apr. 4, 2008
Mainstream Melee: Wolfowitz.
May 19, 2007
Pundit Roundtable: Leaks.
July 9, 2006
A WILLisms.com(ic), by Ken McCracken
July 14, 2006
Powered by Movable Type 3.17
Site Design by Sekimori
WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy):
The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
This Week's Carnival of Revolutions:
Carnival Home Base:
'Brave' Path To 9/11?Thankfully, ABC is going to run the Path To 9/11 miniseries despite the thuggish tactics of Democrats threatening both legal action and ABC's license. It was not bravery that is keeping the miniseries on the air however - ABC has a $40 million investment in this project, and with the controversy surrounding the miniseries now at a perfect high ebb tonight, the ratings should be huge. It was a no-brainer for ABC to keep the show going.
As far as I can tell, here is what the detractors are complaining about:
Among the inaccuracies alleged by Clinton is that while the 9/11 Commission was not critical of his efforts to apprehend al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the movie insinuates that he was preoccuppied with fighting his impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky situation. The movie also has Clinton security adviser Sandy Berger denying authorization to CIA agents about to capture bin Laden, when the 9/11 Commission report said Berger actually gave the CIA the OK and was overruled by CIA chief George Tenet.
The insinuation that Clinton was preoccupied with the Lewinsky affair is absolutely accurate, regardless of what the 9/11 Commission concluded. I know, I was there - I saw the expertly prepared phalanx of Clinton toadies that went on the air and defended Clinton tooth and nail. I saw his entire cabinet line up to say they all believed the President. I saw the bare-knuckled court fights to protect the president from having to defend himself in court. Don't tell me it didn't occupy most, if not all, of President Clinton's time. If Clinton were a man of honor, he would have bravely taken his lumps, knowing as he did that the charges against him were in fact true, instead of putting our nation at great risk by shirking his responsibilities. Clinton's ego and 'legacy' never take a back seat.
The second objection is that the attempt to capture bin Laden was overruled by Tenet and not Berger. This is a minor, trivial distinction. As if the entire miniseries should be pulled to protect the honor of a man convicted of stealing documents from the National Archives - probably in an attempt to further whitewash Bill Clinton's reputation. Berger, Tenet - it doesn't matter when the truth is the Clintonistas had Osama in their sites and let him go. That isn't 'fake but accurate' - that is the incontrovertible truth. Bill Clinton even admitted as such. Clinton later 'retracted' such statements, once he realized the damage it had done to his precious legacy. I ask you however: which is more believable coming from the World's Most Famous Liar - an admission against interest, or a CYA excuse?
For all the complaints that Bush never admits a mistake, you don't see the Republicans and the White House objecting to this portrayal of their mistakes. The Republicans want to be tough on terror, while the Clintons and the Democrats want to appear to be tough on terror - which is why they are fighting so desperately against this miniseries. For all the mistakes the Bush administration made, at least they can point to very significant victories in the war on terror. The Democrats, by contrast, have nothing to show and everything to hide.
Update: If nothing else, the miniseries is making lots of people lose their already tenuous grasp of reality -
"Disney returns to the rascist, anti-semitic ... McCarthyite roots of its founder. Walt would have loved this movie.
Bob Iger must pay. Mickey Rat must die. Disney must be destroyed."
The Path To 9/11 was anti-semitic and McCarthyite? Buddy, you forgot to say it was fascist, fattening and in bad taste as well. I mean, you are allowed more than five or so lines of commentary at Kos, surely you could have stuffed in all the other nasty epithets that came to mind also? Why limit yourself so?
Mickey Rat must die.
Just remember that one when you pull the lever this November.
Posted by Ken McCracken · 10 September 2006 06:05 PM
I thought that was a right wing conspiracy! Like when the right wingers bombed a sudanese asprin factory the day lewinski gets called up to testify infront of the grand jury ohhhh and oops....clinton just gave a DNA sample on that day as well. yikes!
Nah, he wasn't preoccupied at all. all presidents want to be remembered for being impeached.
Posted by: christian at September 10, 2006 07:24 PM
Good summary of the show, I found it fascinating and well put together although it puts the FBI in a very good light and doesn't mention the ABle Danger nor the wall separting the intelligencies errected by the Clinton regime. I can say from personal knowledge that State's role in terrorism at this period was minimal and its INR terrorism section was a bad joke, composed of hacks who couldn't make it in a real intelligence capacity. I did think that it was important to show that torture is something the jihaddies dread (no sane man can take torture) and the aspects of our legal system that work against us in the war on terror.
Posted by: ThomasJackson at September 11, 2006 12:19 AM
Heh, I am pretty sure that not even the psychotic ones can take torture, either.
All the more reason to use it when necessary, I suppose.
Posted by: Ken McCracken at September 11, 2006 12:26 AM