HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Jan. 20, 2007 Aging Hollywood actor Robert Redford started his annual Sundance movie festival with yet another rant against the Bush Administration. As is usually the case with these attacks from the Left it was in front of a friendly audience where the prospect of true debate was virtually nil. There were no specific decisions being questioned or alternatives presented, it was the general drive-by attack which says, "I'm right because I say I am, and I don't need to hear any question about it." A key component of the attack was yet again that the Bush Administration is somehow squelching debate in this country, that opposing viewpoints are not being heard. Fortunately, for all of us, as Redford stated, his film festival helps get that "opposing viewpoint" out there. The fact that opposition to Bush's policies is being squelched came as a big surprise to Michael Moore, Al Franken, Rosie O'Donnell, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, roughly 99.4% of Hollywood, Bruce Springsteen, the entire CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN News departments and just about everyone else who makes a living in front of a television camera or behind a microphone. The absurdity of Mr. Redford's statement is best displayed in his own words: "In light of what's happened in the last six years, political diversity has attempted to be thwarted, and we have kept it alive here [Sundance]. We have nodded here to any of the snuffing attempts that have come from the Administration....I think anybody with a rational mind, with a sense of decency, is being positioned as a lefty by the behavior of the extreme right." The irony, and arrogance, of Robert Redford comes across pretty clear. Individuals who are "rational" and have a "sense of decency" are those who agree with his point of view, which is clearly an anti-war position. We are left to assume that anyone who is in favor of winning in Iraq is irrational and without decency. Also, note how, in typical fashion, Redford comes up with no examples of how the Administration has attempted to "snuff" any opposing viewpoints. It is common of Bush critics to make general accusations, without the slightest hint of accompanying support, and expect the masses to eat it up. Further, is there anything in Redford's statement which conveys the idea that he himself is open to hearing alternative viewpoints from his own? He certainly does not appear to be inviting conservative movie makers to Sundance anytime soon. The accusation that the Bush Administration has been squelching debate is one which is laughable to those with any perspective and objectivity. Even if you disagree with his politics, it is folly to state that there is a shortage of opposition viewpoints. Even more, the accusers seem to have their own shortage of specific instances where this alleged censorship has taken place. (This reminds me of the empty accusations that citizens in Florida, or elsewhere, were disenfranchised in the 2000 and 2004 elections. If the Left could find even one person who was denied the right to vote, rest assured that individual would be marched across our television screens for months; I'm still waiting.) Part of the problem is the Left defines "censorship" as being present any time a conservative viewpoint is allowed to be conveyed freely without interruption; that's just not right. Everyone knows when conservatives speak they are to be shouted down immediately, just visit pretty much any college campus and see how accepting the left is of different viewpoints. Also, these same people believe they are entitled to say what they want when they want without being exposed to any rebuttal. And, more to the point, are we really supposed to believe that liberal filmmakers cannot find an avenue of distribution for their movies in liberal Hollywood, so Sundance needs to come to the rescue? It is clear that Robert Redford does not even listen to his own words when he talks, or surely he would see the hypocrisy and distortion. Those on the Left should not have to lie to make their points. In truth, it was the former Clinton Administration which attempted to use its influence to yank an ABC movie covering the events leading up to 9/11, because the film made Clinton and his team look far less than competent and engaged in fighting terrorism. That same movie was also critical of the Bush Administration, yet there was not the slightest attempt by Bush to have the plug pulled on the broadcast. Let's also remember it was Clinton crony, Sandy Berger, who was caught stealing, and has admitted to destroying, classified documents on national security in the middle of the 9/11 Commission's investigation. The problems that liberals might be experiencing, and rightly so, is that people are tired of hearing "It's Bush's fault" at every turn. The population wants something more than a litany of what is wrong with the current administration. The country is open to alternative ideas, and the Bush Administration might be steadfast in its own beliefs, but in no way has it stifled political opponents' perspectives. If Democrats have something truly useful to offer, the floor is theirs. Of course, as surveys show, most of us do not believe the Democrats have any better ideas than Bush. And when we demand to hear something better from this party, don't be surprised if all we get is the sweet sound of crickets chirping, or perhaps, "It's Bush's fault." ------------ About the author: Ed Abraham is a concerned citizen living in flyover country, U.S.A., who happens to be truly disgusted by the loss of common sense in our society and is doing all he can to try to reinstall it. Email: eabra@myway.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
