« Zarqawi Officially an Evil Doer | Main | Appeals Court Rules Against Mass Searches at Protest »
October 16, 2004
New Movie On John Kerry's Life
A new documentary on John Kerry's life has recently been released, opening in theaters nationwide Oct. 1. Called Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry, the film focuses mainly on Kerry's life as a young man in the late 60's and early 70's, paying particular attention to Kerry's service in the Navy during the Vietnam war.
The film traces Kerry's early life as a young man who chooses to enlist in the Navy and to go to Vietnam. The film reveals intimate, first person accounts of Kerry's war service through his own private letters, his eloquent journal, and the vivid memories of the men who served at his side. When Kerry came home disillusioned by the war, he and his fellow Vietnam Veterans challenged Congress and the Nixon administration. As Kerry became a nationally known anti-war activist, the Nixon White House plotted to discredit his leadership, but significantly could find "nothing on him," as Colson reveals via Watergate tapes. Despite Nixon's attempt to undermine John Kerry's political career during his 1972 unsuccessful run for US Congress, Kerry persevered, eventually winning election to the Senate in 1984 and receiving the Democratic nomination for president in 2004.
If you can't make it to a theater, the producers of the movie have made it available for download in Quicktime format.
FTP download New York server (100 simultaneous users)
FTP download Los Angeles server (40 simultaneous users)
FTP download Server for clients with slow connections (15 simultaneous users)
BitTorrent link
Posted by bcoffee at October 16, 2004 01:46 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.icantthink.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/55
Comments
While you are promoting movies on Kerry, why not promote, at the same time, the "Stolen Honor" movie. It seems to tell a completly different story. Give each movie a fair shot among your readers and allow them to make their own decisions. I believe many of your readers can think! Half information is really no information at all!
Posted by: Christine Burkett at October 21, 2004 07:29 PM
Hi Christine.
Thanks for stopping by. We're glad to have you.
And I have to say that I actually agree with you, to a point. Let's take it step-by-step.
"While you are promoting movies on Kerry, why not promote, at the same time, the "Stolen Honor" movie."
I didn't really feel that I was actually "promoting" the movie, so much as I was simply pointing out to readers where and how they could obtain it should they wish to view it.
"It seems to tell a completly different story."
Yes, it does "seem" to tell a different story. However, since I have not been able to see the movie myself, I can only judge by what others have said. And I don't really like to do that. As far as I know, the movie has not been broadcast yet and is not in the theatres. It was originally scheduled to be aired by Sinclair Broadcasting affiliates; however, the last that I heard was that Sinclair had decided not to air it due to sponsor's concerns. For the record, I support their right to air whatever they choose. Also, since I don't live in one of the affected market areas, presumably I would not have been able to see it anyway.
"Give each movie a fair shot among your readers and allow them to make their own decisions."
Here's my problem, Christine. I support presenting a balanced viewpoint. While it's true that I poke a lot of fun at Mr. Bush on this site, I would be just as likely to point the finger at Mr. Kerry, were he the President and he was making mistakes and decisions that I didn't agree with. The problem is that I don't see that pointing out a "pro-Kerry" film as well as an "anti-Kerry" film would constitute balance. I would be much more inclined to balance a "pro-Kerry" film with a "pro-Bush" film. I just haven't run across a "pro-Bush" film yet. If you know of one, please let me know.
"I believe many of your readers can think!"
I agree completely. I'm the one who can't think clearly because of all the noise out there.
"Half information is really no information at all!"
Once again, I must agree completely. As a matter of fact, I may have to adopt that as the new site motto. That is, if you don't mind.
In closing, we would once again like to thank you for stopping by, and would like to extend an invitation for you to visit anytime.
Posted by: bcoffee at October 21, 2004 08:39 PM
It is easy to obtain a copy of "Stolen Honor" just go to www.stolenhonor.com/. By the way from what I have heard the reason Sinclair Broadcasting decided not to air the documentary was because of the tremendous pressure from liberal groups and a barrage of legal threats and lawsuits. What happens to free speech when the liberal democrat's don't like what is being said? Where were they when Fahrenheit 9/11 was released? How come no protest there? Did you see our President or his supporters causing such an uproar? There are fine pro-Bush books out there speaking of his life. The reason you haven't heard of any Bush documentaries is because there is nothing in his past so controversial and politically charged as Kerry's testimony. If Kerry has nothing to hide and he did nothing wrong why all the frantic work to keep this quite. Why not release his records to the public? President Bush did.
Posted by: C Burkett at October 21, 2004 10:42 PM
Actually Christine, I think you totally missed bcoffee's points in his reply. I have to agree with his point that things don't balance out by pointing to a "pro-Kerry" documentary and then to an "anti-Kerry" documentary. I think that bcoffee was quite gracious in stating that he would be more than happy to give equal space to both candidates by posting a link to a "Pro Bush" documentary/film/video if one were available. You say it's "easy" to obtain a copy of "Stolen Honor", yet you point to a website that asks you to pay for the "anti-Kerry" documentary. You make mention of "pro-Bush" books that are available, but again, these are not items that are easily accessible at no cost on the internet.
"The reason you haven't heard of any Bush documentaries is because there is nothing in his past so controversial and politically charged as Kerry's testimony." Have you actually seen the movie Farenheit 9/11? I believe there was a plethora of controversial and politically charged issues concerning President Bush. I find it hard to believe that this is the reasoning for there being no "pro-Bush" documentaries.
As for the Bush administration's reaction to Farenheit 9/11, I believe you are mistaken that they did not create an uproar. So desperate were Bush Republicans to kill Michael Moore's film, they hired a public relations firm to set up a web site attacking Moore. The site, MoveAmericaForward.com, claims to be "non-partisan," but a glance at the "About" page of the site reveals the director and staff of Move America Forward are all diehard Republicans, anti-tax activists, and former legislative staffers. The PR firm is Russo Marsh & Rogers.
Russo Marsh & Rogers is a GOP consultation firm. In 2002, Ron Rogers teamed up with Reagan heavyweight Lyn Nofziger and Ed Rollins to work on the gubernatorial campaign of Bill Simon. In other words, Move America Forward is about as partisan as it gets without putting the GOP seal of approval on the web site. In short, Move America Forward's campaign was a Republican dirty trick designed to smear Moore and pressure movie theater owners not to run his film.
And you mention yet another Bush controversy. The release of his "records" to the public. It took a federal judge ordering the Pentagon to find and make public any unreleased files about President Bush´s Vietnam-era Air National Guard service to resolve a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by The Associated Press. And even then all of his files were not released. To date, it still isn't known how many more may someday surface. Some surfaced last week as a matter of fact.
I agree that half information is really no information all. Unfortunately it seems to me that most people are only interested in "half information" when it comes to their own political interests.
Posted by: JT Frog at October 21, 2004 11:39 PM
I will not argue with you over all the facts, I am the first to say that I don't know all that is going on in this self-centered world we live in. And I am sure there is deception on both sides. I am not a huge follower of the news nor do I have the time or will to search out all of the special interest groups that come up with all this stuff. May I ask who is at the bottom of putting out this pro-Kerry look at his testimony and life? From the script referred to above by bcoffee it looks as if Kerry his self wrote the bulk of it from "his own private letters and his eloquent journal" If I was running for office and could have a film made from my own writings I would make it available for free over the web too! I might not like Kerry but I have to admit that he is no fool. As to the files being released, how come the Associated press has not asked for Kerry's? Maybe they have and I am clueless. Enlighten me if you would. Also what files surfaced last week? The last ones I heard of were the ones Dan Rather uncovered.
Posted by: C. Burkett at October 22, 2004 01:03 AM
By the way, in answer to bcoffee and JT Frog on the issue of promoting a pro-Bush film as a balance to a pro-Kerry film. That would still be half truth when the issue at hand is one side of the same story. There are legitimate Vietnam vets out there on both sides of the issue of Kerry's testimony about his fellow soldiers. To hear from only the pro-Kerry side is telling only half their story. To be truly fair on the Moore film you would have to have a pro-Bush look at the situation. You are correct in saying there is not one out there, which is a shame, but does not mean that there is not a pro-bush view of the situation out there. And was Fahrenheit 9/11 easily accessed by you over the internet for free? Why would you be willing to pay for that movie and not the Stolen Honor movie if you are interested in a balance between pro-Kerry and pro-Bush. Would that not be the same thing, a negative-Bush and a negative-Kerry? You are again correct Mr. Frog in saying "most people are only interested in half information when it comes to their own political interest". You my friend fall into that category too!
Posted by: C. Burkett at October 22, 2004 08:02 AM
Unlike your own claim, C., I consider myself very well informed as to both candidates strengths, weaknesses and histories. This is not my website and I don't have the authority to write or post articles to prove this point. I didn't reply to your first post in order to start a debate. Nor frankly would I have the desire to enter into a debate with someone who has stated they will not argue over all the facts. I for one recognize the futility of thinking reason can triumph over faith.
While I may or may not agree with the opinions expressed on this website, I do find them interesting and sometimes even amusing. I replied to your original comment for two reasons. The first reason being that I was impressed with bcoffee's gracious reply to your post. The second reason being that I wanted to share some actual facts with the readers regarding some of your statements.
In answer to your question about Bush's records, no the last files uncovered were not those of Dan Rather. Although I may have mistated that files were uncovered last week (time does fly when you're having fun!), as it was actually two weeks ago. On October 5th, more than a week after a court-imposed deadline to turn over all records of President Bush's military service, the Texas Air National Guard belatedly produced documents that included Bush's orders for his last day of active duty in 1973. The Texas Air National Guard did not explain the delay in releasing the records.
The orders show Bush was on "no-fly" status for his last days of duty because he had been grounded almost a year earlier for skipping an annual medical. The 1973 orders come from the most controversial period in Bush's years in the Texas Air National Guard. After May 1972, Bush skipped training for six months, failed to appear for the required physical examination, got permission to train at an Alabama unit whose commanders say he never showed up and put in a flurry of training in 1973 in an effort to meet minimum requirements before leaving for Harvard Business School.
Bush has insisted he fulfilled all of his Air National Guard duties and says he is proud of his service. What on earth does Bush have to be proud of?
In April, John Kerry released military records providing certification of his medals from the Vietnam War, including three Purple Hearts for combat injuries. In August, it was determined that Kerry's records countered his critics claims that those medals were not deserved. Kerry has made public hundreds of documents about his military service and posted them on the Internet. Because he served with the Navy rather than the National Guard, his unit records are much more accessible than those of Bush. The Navy maintains a historical center at the Washington Navy Yard where researchers can freely inspect the records of Kerry's Swift boat outfit, Coastal Division 11. The records include after-action reports and unit histories, which have made possible a detailed reconstruction of Kerry's day-to-day activities.
And finally, there was never a question as to whether or not I would be willing to pay to see Stolen Honor as I would Farenheit 9/11. Nor did I state that I hadn't seen the "anti-Kerry" film. My response above was in reply to your stating that it was "easy" to acquire the film. That may be true in your case, but with millions of Americans living in poverty, it may not be so "easy" for them to shell out a minimum of thirty dollars to buy the dvd. Nor did I promote one film over the other. Nor does it appear that bcoffee promoted any film or documentary over another. It appears he was merely pointing to an easily accessible and free document made available on the internet.
I do admire the faith that you show in our President. And I believe in freedom of speech and respect your right to express your opinions. However, I find it unfortunate that supporters of both Bush and Kerry are not more informed of facts concerning both of the candidates. For I believe that a vote for any Presidential candidate in any election should be an informed and knowledgeable choice and not one cast merely on faith alone.
Posted by: JT Frog at October 22, 2004 10:26 AM
I respect your position also. I don't want to get into a debate either. I was just having a little fun. I enjoy the political process. Not that I agree with how either side runs it's campaign but jumping in can be a diversion for the day. I do have a lot of faith in our President. No one is perfect and we all make mistakes. Bush is not God and can not know all and see all. I have to believe that he is doing what he thinks is best for the American people or else it would be hard to believe in our government system. I am sure if Gore had been president and had to handle this whole 9/11 thing there would be a lot of passion for his right and wrong decisions. That is why I am grateful to live in a free country. I am sure that whoever becomes our next President will do the best he knows how to run this country and make decisions on what is best for the American interest. I personally believe in the character of President Bush because he stands for my deep core values and I have to support that! Because when it all boils down to the hard decisions facing any President his deep convictions and character are what will count! I am not saying Kerry is not a man of character but his moral views and convictions are quite different than mine, where Bush's might be quite different from yours. That is where the political process works, we each have a say on who we want to lead us and the majority rules. I am OK with that. I have just discovered this web site and have enjoyed reading bcoffee's point of view and also that of pmcmahon. I have even commented on one of his writings (about the beheading by terrorist). And you are correct that coffee was very gracious in his reply to me. I did appreciate that. I am sure he is a great guy! Can we call a truce?
Posted by: C Burkett at October 22, 2004 12:01 PM
FYI - it was announced yesterday on Fox news that the producers of the "Stolen Honor" documentary plan to release it for free over the internet next week.
Posted by: C. Burkett at October 23, 2004 11:28 AM
