Brian, this is simply a movie. You have to understand that the Westwing is over and there is more than PBS to watch.

While you are at it, Brian, maybe you can explain how Clinton made us safer after the embassy attacks or the Cole or…..Thought so.

John Podhoretz, conservative columnist and Fox News contributor says: The portrait of Albright is an unacceptable revision of recent history and an unfair mark on a public servant who, no matter her shortcomings, doesn’t deserve to be remembered by millions of Americans as the inadvertent (and truculent) savior of Osama bin Laden. Samuel Berger, Clinton’s national security adviser, also seems to have just cause for complaint.

James Taranto, OpinionJournal.com editor says: The Clintonites may have a point here. A few years ago, when the shoe was on the other foot, we were happy to see CBS scotch “The Reagans.”

Dean Barnett, conservative commentator posting on Hugh Hewitt’s blog says: One can (if one so chooses) give the filmmakers artistic license to [fabricate a scene]. But if that is what they have done, conservative analysts who back this movie as a historical document will mortgage their credibility doing so.

Chris Wallace, Fox News Sunday anchor says: When you put somebody on the screen and say that’s Madeleine Albright and she said this in a specific conversation and she never did say it, I think it’s slanderous, I think it’s defamatory and I think that ABC and Disney should be held to account.

Captain’s Quarters blog says:If the Democrats do not like what ABC wants to broadcast, they have every right to protest it — and in this case, they had a point.

Bill Bennett, conservative author, radio host, and TV commentator says: Look, “The Path to 9/11″ is strewn with a lot of problems and I think there were problems in the Clinton administration. But that’s no reason to falsify the record, falsify conversations by either the president or his leading people and you know it just shouldn’t happen.

Rick Moran’s take on the liberal furor over “The Path to 9/11″:
This, the left can deal with. They can rightly point out that the President is playing politics with the anniversary. But the feelings of solidarity with the President th…

It matters little whether this show is aired in its entirety or altered beyond recognition. In today’s world, the original edit can be shown all over the world via the internet. Moreover, any historical inaccuracies in the film can be exposed in a matter of minutes. So the truth will out, and nothing can prevent it.

This is what drives the leftists to distraction. Their feeble grasp on old media is weakening and they have no control over new media. And like the spoiled children they are, their only response is a screaming fit.

I’ve always said there are two and only two kinds of people. One kind read Orwell’s 1984 and identifies with the tortured individual and says, “Thank God I’m an American.” The other kind reads 1984 and identifies with the oppressive government and says, “Oh, that’s how it’s done.”

The people on the left today are of the other kind and grew up thinking they knew how it’s done. Thus the infiltrated the Democrat party, then the largest and most influential party, old media and academia. Goebbell’s Big Lie is their mantra; Orwell’s Newspeak (i.e., political correctness) is their strategy; intimidation is their tactic; and totalitarianism is their goal. By the 1990s they had almost fully realized their will to power.

But along came talk radio (thank you, Rush!) and the internet, then the bloggers and most recently video blogging and Wide Awakes Radio. The left’s tenuous hold on media and their ability to determine the pseudo-Narrative is fading right before their eyes, and there’s nothing they can do about it. No wonder they’re livid.

Rick, if someone did a biography of you that was 100% accurate except for one little scene with you having sex with a goat, you would be okay with it? I mean, its just one scene that is not accurate.

I’m pleased to see not all of the Right has taken leave of their senses and understand that the issues raised for the Reagan Mini-series parallel this one :

Glenn:

I see you quote me on your blog–for the record, I oppose this miniseries as well if it is fiction dressed up as fact, creates caricatures of real persons and events that are inaccurate, and inserts quotes that were not uttered, especially to make a point that was not intended. I said as much on Bill Bennett’s Morning in America radio show (as did he, btw) this a.m. That ABC is stating “the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue, and time compression,” is not at all comforting on this issue. 9/11 needs no fiction, nor does its buildup. It was all dramatic–and horrifically dramatic–enough.

Sincerely,

Seth Leibsohn
Producer-Bill Bennett’s Morning in America
Fellow-The Claremont Institute

Final note: Putting out lies that misinform the public harms this nation, whether it is about 9/11 or Reagan. And it diminishes the Right’s integrity at a time when the public is growing increasingly skeptical of the Right’s own narrative.

I’m thinking that if Slick Willie were holding the book it would be sideways with an extra piece of paper flopped down… if you catch my drift…

It would a lovely thing if ABC released a “Director’s Cut” version on DVD and it sold a BUNCH of copies such that the dems have their collectivist noses rubbed in it.