Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

That's it exactly. It's obvious.

i've been mulling a protest @ sinclair's corp HQ in hunt valley, but i'm not decided if it would do more harm tham good in respect to the points you make above....

However, we can't just let it go.
Unanswered attacks create even more damage.
It's a tough choice.

It's an abuse of the public trust, considering that the airwaves are owned by the public and broadcasters are licensed to use them and it's an abuse of campaign laws. It couldn't be allowed to go unchallenged.

At the same time we need to try to avoid providing air time for the bastards. I hate when this becomes one of those "he says she says" argument: Dems say it's a crime, Repukes say it's freedom, lets hear both and decide.

Just like with the Swift Liars, every news channel will probably play clips of the movie for weeks, giving it more airtime on the news than it would have gotten on the right wing stations.

This is not accidental, it's Bush and the right wing media's strategy.

5. Then go ahead and air the piece knowing that they have generated a tremendous amount of interest in it.

After all this hooplah, I really can't see them NOT airing it now barring some injunction from the FCC or other legal maneuver .

How do you get the discussion back onto Bush's failings?

that by doing this Sinclair is risking their revenue, licenses, and lawsuits. None of which is good for business. The only thing I can think of is that there is a deal for Shrub and co. to protect them from the backlash.

They are walking a road that Dan Rather inadvertently went down earlier. Makes me wonder what Karl promised them for this risky diversion.

If you fight it, you might win a Pyrrhic victory: you get Sinclair to stop airing the documentary, but you give the right wing free airtime to bash Kerry in the process.

If you don't fight it, the RW hate machine just pours their drivel into the ready-and-waiting uncritical minds of an unsuspecting public, costing us 0.5-1% in every market in which it airs.

Why can't we play this game? Why must we always take the fucking high ground?

-MR

Their guy is a total failure, so their only hope is to discredit the other guy and keep people arguing about these types of things instead of pointing out how badly * and his cronies have screwed everything up!

If they didn't want there to be controversy, they could keep it a heck of a lot more quiet. Instead, it's known to everyone know. They must want a scandal.

...get everyone, including us, to talk about non issues. yet again.

this all just seems like yet another diversion tactic to keep us from hammering the real issues of this campaign. like why * can't answer a goddamned question without a) being able to rehearse it b) having dick there holding his hand while answering c) having someone feeding him the answers. just for example.

though we have to do something to stop this sinclair crap, we also have to keep doing what we have been doing. redouble our efforts and keep the pressure on. it is working. only a few weeks left to make a change.

A lot of people are playing into the Republicans hands by giving Sinclar so much attention. Let's face it, without attention, how many people would really choose to watch a 42-minute documentary on John Kerry. I wouldn't, even if it was fair. The only thing that's making this documentary interesting is the obsession of some progressives in trying to get it off the air. Ignore it.

Once the flames are fanned, use repsonse of online poll to justify not running the movie.

I can't help but wonder if people aren't finally starting to tune out this garbage. The last debate should kick this off the news for at least a day or so (more if Kerry really clobbers the idiot, which I'm expecting). Then it's up to the Kerry campaign and the Democratic talking heads to just keep hammering, hammering, hammering. When they get asked to discuss Sinclair, they should just bring it right back to Bush. "This is propaganda, pure and simple, intended to distract from the real issue of this campaign, which is Dubya's record."

If they can do that, I think people who are easily shaped will find the Dems strong. At least I hope so.

Call the local Sinclair advertisers and let them know there will be a boycott of their products.

I think Sinclair sees a way to dupe sheeple into pouring new advertising dollars into a sinking enterprise.

Killing two birds with one stone?

sinclair should be blasted from the highest mountain. all their advertisers should be contacted. the fcc should be pestered about this. mutual funds that own their stock should be written to.

republicans think they're good at this boycott crap. they pitched a fit when natalie maines made on off the cuff comment about bush. they constantly threaten people who speak their consciences. they write letters. they make phone calls. they tie up the fax machines of papers that write unflattering articles.

f*ck them and f*ck them hard. give them a taste of their own medicine. yet make them down the whole bottle.

if the cry is loud enough, long enough, and efficient enough, no one will care what sinclair's strategy was. they will merely be remembered as the station that tried to break fcc rules and lost their licenses for it.

it also wouldn't hurt to remind some local advertisers that sinclair's president, dave smith, was arrested in a prostitution sting about 10 years ago. is that really the sort of fellow, mr. local furniture advertiser, that you want to spend your money with?

Sinclair does not care if they ruin the company's reputation and hurt it financially? It is a business and their choice will have a major impact, it seems.

The stock ticker is going down. The investors will not be happy with the decision. I have heard that people are selling their stock and considering any loss as a sort of a campaign contribution.

This is the same screwed up reasoning we used to ignore the swift-boat liars when they first came on the scene.

The strategy behind Sinclair is simple, to air an anti-Kerry screed days before the election. It's our job to either stop it or discredit it.

We ignored the Swift Boat Liars AFTER they ran the ads. That was bad, but unless you honestly believe we can stop Sinclair from airing the show, it makes more sense to ignore them until after the show airs. I don't think there's any way to stop Sinclair. The FEC has already demonstrated a complete unwillingness to use its authority in any way at all. The FEC is a do nothing commission.

this if we ignore it? Give me a break.

But we don't want it to cross the line from right-wing talk shows that are watched mostly be right-wingers into the general population. Then again, I don't have cable. Is the film being discussed on a broad range of cable shows? Is it as big a story on cable as was F911 or The Passion of Christ?

Bush's undistinguished military career?

perhaps fair-minded decent people, undecided and leaning-Bush, will be angered by this RW abuse of the airwaves to promote an (already largely-discredited) smear against Kerry and will be turned off by it. Perhaps they will be persuaded by this outrage NOT to vote for Bush.

What do you think?

and not only greatly energize our base, but show undecided voters the true nature of the desperate GOP smear machine, who will stop at virtually nothing to try and win in November.

I think maybe the American people have reached critical mass on the whole rehashing of Vietnam and using it to smear Kerry. I just have to wonder if this shit will now backfire and hurt Shrub instead.

to do would be to go after the advertisers and the FEC. Complaining to media only alerts them that they have a "story" there. Complaining to Sinclair would merely flatter them.

the program honoring our war dead? Seems a little different.

Which is why it would best be ignored rather than feed the flames.
DU is not helping on this account.