Hypocrites, and Cowards

And there's no better word to describe these outraged democrats. What follows are the last two paragraphs at Betsy's Page


Hypocrisy--

"Think for a moment about the concerted action by Democrats, their lawyers, former White House operatives, Bill Clinton, sympathetic historians, and lefty bloggers to stop this show. Remember that this was the same crowd that was full of praise of for Fahrenheit 9/11 for crystallizing their opposition to George Bush. Accuracy and verisimilitude didn't bother them then. And they weren't saying a word about 60 Minutes "fake but accurate" story on Bush's National Guard service. Now, ask yourself. If this crowd were to control the White House, how many more of these attempts to stifle any criticism of them would we be seeing? Think of how much has been aired during Bush's tenure, even a movie depicting him being assassinated and more denials of civil liberties gets made without Bush's White House unleashing its lawyers. But, for this thing, the Democrats go to the mattresses. Are they perhaps modeling for us what their response would be to further criticism if they should gain control of the White House - or even of Congress? Don't forget those not-so-veiled threats to ABC's license. Ponder that chill wind."

Of course they'll tell you that Fahrenheit 9/11 was a documentary, not a TeleDrama-- two different animals --and so no comparison of the two are valid; which is typical of the angry, vitriolic Left. It is their sole prerogative to criticize whomever they desire, but they themselves are above such. They are the erudite, the elite, the embodiment of refined thinking, and the repository of all things right and good in America. How dare anyone question their patriotism. Simply put, they are the princes of democracy, and the best that America has to offer. But at the end of the day they are merely hypocrites.


Cowardice--

The ABC docudrama seems to have made up scenes. I so wish they hadn't. Docudramas do so all the time, but we need to be focusing on what actually happened on the path to 9/11. There was quite enough from the true story that they could have used rather than casting doubt on the show's veracity by fabricating scenes. Now they've given Clinton's defenders a legitimate hook for their complaints by criticizing the mini-series for having fabricating "fake but accurate" scenes. Imagine if this same debate were taking place over real scenes for which a lot of evidence exists. The whole discussion would be completely different. We'd be talking about what Clinton's administration did and did not do regarding Al Qaeda rather than whether a docudrama that makes up scenes is worth broadcasting or watching. I so wish that that were the debate we were having rather than seeing people defend the fictional in the docudrama. Getting lost in the whole debate is whether there were missed opportunities during the Clinton years. How lucky for the Clinton people that they have managed to shift the debate away from their true record.

Hubris was a favorite word of the Left some time back-- an accusation leveled upon their political foes. Blind and searing hatred of Bush has not only clouded their wits, but has as well rendered them incapable of recognizing their aforementioned hypocrisies. They are so desperate to hammer out upon the forge of rhetoric a Clinton Legacy. They have to do this because he hasn't one worthy of remembrance. He spent eight years leading by opinion polls, instead of his Rhodes Scholar intellect. Look at it this way: If Clinton did indeed have a good positive legacy, why bother trying to squash ABC's docudrama? Do they utterly lack confidence in their legacy? Aren't the American people nuanced enough to see through this veil of deceit and out-right lies? Or are they worried this 'fictionalized' history lesson will remind American's of Clinton's actual legacy?

Democrats can't tolerate criticism, and they haven't the courage to stand for anything positive. Why would anyone vote for such? Oh, that's right....