Clinton "Officials" React to ABC's "The Path

[Sonny]

Sonny is saying that this film maker is a private individual, and could put anything he wanted in his film.

Of course, he'd argue the exact opposite in the case of the Reagan Mini Series, because it's politically expedient.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth yet again Adam. I would argue neither of those points.

I don't think elected representatives should use their government position to threaten private companies & abuse the First Amendment. If private individuals wish to petition ABC, so be it. I don't think it's wise or prudent to US Senators to do so. The First Amendment is pretty clear on this.

There is an important distinction in there you are missing Adam. And the two cases are not the same.

[Sonny]

The first amendment doesn't apply to private individuals.

I dont understand this.

Sorry made a bad typo there. Should have said the first amedment only applies to the government.

[Campbell]

The first amendment doesn't apply to private individuals.

I dont understand this.

Sorry made a bad typo there. Should have said the first amedment only applies to the government.

I still don't understand what you mean by the first amendment only applying to the government? Why wouldnt it apply to all US citizens?

[Sonny]

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[CyLaxKeeper00]

sem-i-co-lon [sem-i-kohn-luhn]

–noun the punctuation mark (;) used to indicate a major division in a sentence where a more distinct separation is felt between clauses or items on a list than is indicated by a comma, as between the two clauses of a compound sentence.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1635–45; semi- + colon1]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

[Campbell]

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I assume you were referencing that there is no right to petition private industry only the right to petition the government. I agree with that. I also don't think politicians should be using their power to influence the media, especially the entertainment industry.

[Sonny]

When Democratic senators issue a formal letter to ABC threatening their broadcast license - I'd call that a potential violation of the First Amendement.

Frankly I'm surprised that more folks from the Left aren't up in arms about this... True liberals that support the First Amendement (regardless of ideology) should agree. But many appear to be silent as they didn't like the message in the first place.

In any event - Apparently it worked as ABC pulled/severly edited two scences from the show that were not complimentary of Clinton (or his adminstration).

[StrykerFSU]

Has anyone alerted the ACLU?!?!?!?!

But seriously, did anyone actually watch the movie?

[Campbell]

I think the left is probably mixed on it, but I agree with you Sonny about the 1st Amendment. The question is whether the makers of the movie put forth data that is false and as a result would injure certain parties. Republican or Democrat you would have to concede that libel is libel and if the movie is libel then it needs to be changed. I think a lot of the people complaining about the movie were focusing on that aspect. Anything else and people are reading too much into it, big surprise. Getting into a pissing contest about stuff like this is exactly the problem with our country right now, having two parties that spend more time disagreeing with each other than actually governing the country.

[peterwho]

Getting into a pissing contest about stuff like this is exactly the problem with our country right now, having two parties that spend more time disagreeing with each other than actually governing the country.

Exactly!!!

This is my greatest frustration with our government, right now. There is a "majority" party who has lost their ability to lead and an "opposition" party with no ideas, only criticism.

Like them or not, at the end of the day Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neil found a way to compromise on the things that they could in order to make some progress for the betterment of the country.

Now, EVERYTHING is political. What is good for the country, but "bad" for one party becomes bad. What is good for the country, but an issue not "owned" by a particular party, becomes bad, as well.

What is good for the country should be good.

I am not so naive to expect that everything is clearly "good" or "bad", however, I also believe that the current stalemate is worse than taking action and finding that we made a few mistakes.

[Campbell]

Exactly!!!

This is my greatest frustration with our government, right now. There is a "majority" party who has lost their ability to lead and an "opposition" party with no ideas, only criticism.

Well said.

I think this is because our country is led by politicians rather than leaders. This is a point that Bill O'Reilley has brought up in one of his books and I would agree. I think the fact that either side will put the interests of the party over their own is sad.