What do you think about Sinclair Broadcasting company’s decision to air the anti Kerry documentary “Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal” on their 62 local stations?
If you have heard nothing about this here is a cnn report.
I did a little research this morning after discovering that the documentary is a collection of interviews with former vietnam POW’s and decided to see what Kerry actually said in his april 6th 1971 testimony to a house commitee. If any of you wish to read the transcript you will find it in PDF format here:
Also if you dont feel like reading the full 32 pages of it you may still find the first 5-6 pages of value since this is where Kerry’s statements are made that have so inflamed the veterans in the documentary.
I think it is at least as fair as releasing Micheal Moore’s documentary on DVD and VHS so close to the election.
As to whether or not it will sway voters… by this point I feel as though one gets the country one votes for (assuming they will count the votes this time).
It is outrageous! My local station in Asheville, NC is going to forgo regular programming to air the documentary next week. We have a local group who are going to protest in front of it.
But to explain further why I am against the showing of it, is simply because they are releasing it on public TV, which is quite different than selling anti-Bush documentaries. This is being forced upon the public.
But of course, I suppose people have the choice whether or not they want to watch it.
I certainly do not condone hiding the documentary from the public. But it should be presented in a manner that shows fairness for both candidates. And for the most part I see this broadcasting system’s choice quite unfair unless they also aired something similar to Micheal Moore’s documentary in a comparable fashion.
-Disregard this if there has been a showing of anit-Bush propaganda on public TV, for I really do not watch TV, so I might be mistaken.-
I read in a local paper that the program is only being shown in states that are considered close… that might be true or might not, my state is polled as being 70% for Bush, it isn’t being shown here.
My concern is how readily people on both the supposed Left and Right buy so easily into ad hominem and strawman fallacies that are ultimately meaningless.
So what, our last President got a blow job, our current President did drugs and maybe dodged the draft, the Democratic nominee might be a lying, two faced baby killer.
Conservative pundits like pills, gambling, posing in the nude, and perverted telephone calls featuring kinky sex (O’Reilly now).
Some Lefties really do cling to the Hammer and Sickle like Rednecks cling to the Rebel Flag. Some of them are hypocritical elitists.
Who cares… just vote for the best qualified person.
Alas, in a Democracy that would start with somone who isn’t running for office.
There is a difference here I think, and it stems from the connection big corporations have with the republican party. If the roles were reversed I doubt Sinclair would air an inflammotory documentary about Bush. If you havent taken the time to listen to a few of the interview excerpts I recommend doing so, because they give a good insight into the allegations that the documentary makes. This is the way I think of it. It is like a Duke coming to the aiid of a prince in his time of need, although there is a certain fact that I unintentionally left out when I started this thread. I became aware of it only afterward. A couple of nights ago Brit Hume of the Fox news channel conducted an interview with a Sinclair exec, I think he is V.P. of something in the company. Here is a link to that interview.
Apperantly they dont plan on airing the documentary because it is too inflammatory and one sided. Instead they wish to air an hour ling piece which discusses the allegations that were originally made in the documentary. They have even invited Mr. Kerry to participate in order to be fair, or if not Kerry then someone who can speak on his behalf.
It seems like a devious, and overly cunning manuever by a powerful media company that is pro-Bush. The question is whoever, how true are the allegations. I mean is this a topic of discussion that is even worth bringing up at this point. I s the man Kerry was 30+ years ago still the man he is today, and if he should be held accountable, did he even do anything wrong? You also have to understand that these allegations are centered around the main point that Kerry’s actions in 1971-72 hurt vietnam POW’s instead of helping them. That what he did was a betrayal, and that he did it not with the good of the many in mind, but with the desire to further his political career. I think the logic is spurios at best even though I find it fascinating.
G.C.T. Wrote:
“I read in a local paper that the program is only being shown in states that are considered close… that might be true or might not, my state is polled as being 70% for Bush, it isn’t being shown here.”
Ive spent a few hours looking into this today, and I am truly amazed at how many times I have been decieved by primarily liberal news sources that act like they are angry partisans in the streets burning effigies of their “enemy”. Whether or not thats true I dont know, but I really doubt it is for some reason.
G.C.T. Wrote:
“My concern is how readily people on both the supposed Left and Right buy so easily into ad hominem and strawman fallacies that are ultimately meaningless.”
Isnt this called pride. If you put so much stock into one man or a cause you might as well deny the truth if it is against you until the ship is completely submerged. I think one must give up a portion of ones honesty in order to become a partisan.
Americans believe in freedom of speech. Democrats unfortunately do not.
Sinclair Broadcasting’s decision to exercise their Constitutional right to freedom of speech with important election material days before the election is a clear example of the First Amendment in action.
Sinclair is obligated by law to serve the public interest and they are doing so with their decision to broadcast Stolen Honor.
The partisan smear campaign against Sinclair’s Constitutional right to freedom of speech shows that there are domestic enemies in our midst, traitors to be more accurate, who seek to usurp our Constitution and our national heritage. These actions show why we need to weaken media ownership rules, not strengthen them.