Re: Boycott CBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeff McCann wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Jeff McCann wrote:

> > > it through protests, criticism, boycotts, whatever.  But some of the
> > > criticism has been a little out there.  Blasting the casting of James
> > > Brolin because he's married to ultra-lefty Striesand?  C'mon.
> >
> > You seriously don't think the Hollywood lefty producers
> > and casting agents weren't cackling over that?  I do.
> >
> >
> > > It's a
> > > movie, not a documentary, for entertainment, not for education.
> >
> > That's an utterly cynical defense.  It was being hyped
> > by CBS as a more or less accurate portrayal of Reagan's
> > life.
>
>
> Cynical about Hollywood and the media?  Who?  Me?

Your defense was disingenuous.  You wouldn't have
made it had your political favorite been the victim of
the hatchet job.

> > > Reagan's record is a public matter, so it's not like the facts
> > > aren't otherwise readily available.
> >
> > The hatchet piece didn't limit itself to the pulic
> > record.  They cynically and deliberately lied.
>
>
> Really, they just made a TV movie,

No, it was a good bit more than that, and I suspect you
know it.

> and lying about Reagan and his
> administration isn't restricted to Hollywood.  Check out his
> administration's record for lying.

I suppose you have documented evidence about it?

> > > As a politician, he chose to be in the public 
> > > spotlight, so I think he's fair game.  Politicians on both the
> > > Left and Right have been the targets of far worse smears than this.
> >
> > Name one Democratic bigshot who has been the victim of
> > a hatchet piece like this.
>
>
> Clinton.

No.  Nothing even close.

> True Colors.

You mean "Primary Colors".  A novel, clearly modeled on
the early Clinton administration, but not in any way
claiming to be history.

> LBJ.  I forget the program.

Yeah, I'll bet you do.  Unflattering depictions of
Johnson almost always are the work of Democrats trying
to burnish the image of Saint JFK.

> > > Overall, I consider the whole thing a bit of a tempest in a teapot.
> >
> > Maybe.  We'll see what you have to say when and if Fox
> > ever does an unflattering docu-fiction on Clinton.
> > Personally, I'd rather see one on the saintly "Dr."
> > Martin Luther King, Jr., that focuses primarily on his
> > extra-marital affairs and his outrageous plagiarism in
> > his doctoral dissertation; not because I think those
> > were the salient features of his life, but rather
> > because I want to see the crybaby leftists jettison
> > their "principles" and mount the same kind of outraged
> > protest that they're currently complaining about.
>
>
> Yeah.

Yeah.

> You're just standing on principle here.

Absolutely true.

> Your ideology has nothin' to do with it.  Sure.

No more so than yours, and probably much less.  I'm not
a Republican.

I think King was a great figure in our national
development and history (although there should not be a
national holiday for him.)  I just seriously would like
to see the reaction of leftists who idealize the man,
if a similar hatchet job were done on him.  After all,
his affairs and plagiarism are just part of the public
record.

Blacks have already brought pressure successfully to
bear on networks to get programming removed.