‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ [ad] ban?

The Hill ^ | June 24, 2004 | Alexander Bolton

[Windsong]

Since the FEC considers the Republican presidential convention scheduled to begin Aug. 30 a national political primary in which Bush is a candidate, Moore and other politically oriented filmmakers could not air any ad mentioning Bush after July 30

Heck, it will be too late by then. But, sigh, I suppose its better than nothing.

[bolobaby]

Noooo... that will just about be when we'll want to see some hype for "Michael Moore Hates America." Moore will have gotten his word out, but the dissenting position will be stifled.

[Jim Robinson]

LOL. Caught in their own net. It's a damn shame.

[Arkinsaw]

Unfortunately, the law in question is pretty much unconstitutional. It would be wonderful to supress this piece of leftist drivel, but alas, its America.

[swilhelm73]

Noooo... that will just about be when we'll want to see some hype for "Michael Moore Hates America." Moore will have gotten his word out, but the dissenting position will be stifled.

As long as the film isn't lauding Bush or bashing Kerry I don't see why "Michael Moore Hates America" would be effected.

[Wilhelm Tell]

In a draft advisory opinion placed on the FECÕs agenda for todayÕs meeting, the agencyÕs general counsel states that political documentary filmmakers may not air television or radio ads referring to federal candidates within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.

Some short sighted people may gloat over this, but the American Republic is just about finished when such censorship is possible. What is to stop the government from banning the film from theaters if same bureaucrat decides to interpret the campaign finance law that way? I would rather have the chaos and noise of freedom where demagogues like Moore are able to speak than the well-ordered silence of tyranny. The McCain-Feingold "reform" is a dagger through the heart of the Constitution and it needs to be repealed.

[UncleJeff]

"Alas, it's America"??

You actually typed that??

Where people could see it??

[JennysCool]

Well said!

[Nateman]

The court of O'Connor's Supreme Whim utterly ignored the constitution when this law was OKed by the awful 4 + 1 . I hope this movie and others do get advertising banned so that Americans can get mad enough to demand for this rotten law's repeal.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

I guess this will get the Libs to turn against CFR.

[PhilDragoo]

[HiTech RedNeck]

Some short sighted people may gloat over this, but the American Republic is just about finished when such censorship is possible.

Amen, amen. F911 is a vomitous film indeed, but to kill ads for it because it speaks about politicians who happen to be running for re-election is even more vomitous.

[Arkinsaw]

You actually typed that??

Try to read it in context.

[devolve]

Moor is eating too many rabbits.

[MamaLucci]

.....but to kill ads for it because it speaks about politicians who happen to be running for re-election is even more vomitous.

Like it or not (and I do NOT) it's the LAW.

[HiTech RedNeck]

A vomitous law

[patent]

>>>>Noooo... that will just about be when we'll want to see some hype for "Michael Moore Hates America." Moore will have gotten his word out, but the dissenting position will be stifled.



Michael Moore isn't running for office. He isn't running period, nor does it appear he ever has. The law won't apply to a movie criticizing him.

patent

[rwfromkansas]

Agreed.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Because the ads make comments about George Bush, under CFR which recently squeaked past the Supreme Court it is verboten. Never mind that nobody dreams that it could possibly change the outcome of the Republican presidential primaries.

Moore will probably tone down his ads to refer to "recent events involving national leadership" or some such dodge. It won't matter how blatant the film itself is, only the ads on TV.