Talk About Insecure

In a perfect world, the American public would be as outraged by a recent letter drafted by Senate Democrat leaders as those leaders are by the upcoming ABC miniseries that prompted the letter.

The letter – signed by Democrat Senators Harry Reid (the Minority Leader), Richard Durbin, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, and Byron Dorgan – is written in response to ABC’s production of “The Path to 9/11” – a miniseries that portrays the Clinton Administration as failing to do all in its power to combat terrorism and, possibly, prevent the worst terrorist attack on American soil – which took place a scant eight months after Mr. Clinton left office.

It’s really not so stunning, or even disturbing, that Democrats and other supporters of President Clinton are upset over the verdict on his administration that the film reaches. I would expect them to get upset over anything, be it factual or fictitious, that would call into question their competency or judgment. Most all of us would get upset as well in that position. But what is disturbing, and what distinguishes the liberals’ response to this movie from conservatives’ response to any number of commentaries by Bill Moyers, or inaccurate reports from Dan Rather, is the tactics used by the Democrats to try to intimidate a major media outlet into changing its programming.

Following Mr. Clinton’s angry response and contact with the Disney Company’s Robert Iger, the above-mentioned senators sent a letter dated September 7 to Mr. Iger urging him to “uphold your responsibilities as a respected member of American society and as a beneficiary of the free use of the public airwaves to cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program.” (Emphasis mine)

With all the issues that U.S. Senators could be dealing with right now, that the leaders of one of the major parties would take the time to draft such a letter at all lends ironic weight to an idea implied by the film that Democrat national leaders, such as Mr. Clinton are too distracted with trivial matters to deal effectively with major concerns. I’m guessing that President Bush and Senator Bill Frist never drafted a letter to Messrs. Moyers or Rather because they recognized how such an act would belittle men in their position - unlike Mr. Reid and company, who obviously worry excessively how they are viewed by their glamorous friends in Hollywood.

But what’s truly insidious about the letter sent to Mr. Iger may be the idea conveyed by the following excerpt:

“The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.”

Make no mistake about it. This paragraph, contained in a letter written by leaders of a party that aspires to control the U.S. government, is a thinly-veiled threat against the ability of a major media outlet to continue to receive broadcast license renewals. And it smacks of the type of good old-fashioned censorship that people like this are so fond of – incorrectly – accusing conservatives all the time.

I seriously doubt that ABC will cancel the show. As to whether the network will, as Mr. Clinton has demanded, edit the film to change the perception of him it creates, I suppose I will never know (as I haven’t seen the unedited version).

But one thing I do know. Episodes like this only further confirm the fears of many – be they real or simply perceived – that the problem with the Democrat party at the national level goes beyond mere incompetence to oppressiveness. It has been a long-standing tactic of the lunatic fringe left to do all they can to silence opposing voices (remember the pot-clanging rally outside the Capitol during the State of the Union?). As this movement is now the single most powerful faction among the Democrats, it should not be surprising that the tactic becomes standard use. Should the Democrats ever gain total control over the government again while this faction is ascendant, the consequences for American Constitutional freedoms could be severe.