Who really wants to own the media?

I have not seen The Path to 9/11. I have much more important things to do that sit and watch some made for TV Drama. However the contreversy brings an interesting point to light... Where are the Pro-Bush types asking for edits of the Bush failures in the time running up to 9/11? Why is is it the Clinton types who make all the noise? Why is it that the first ammendment is reserved only for the dissenters? I'm all for dissent, I like the idea that the minority can have a say in our society. However, I believe those like myself who belive that we are doing the right thing should also have an eqaul say! We should not have to be editied! We don't edit Michael Moore! I may oppose reckless thoughtless anti-Bush statements, I may boycott those who speak them but I will never endorse the removal of an alternate point of view in any media. Consiqunces are not censorship. Censorship is the witholding of information. As I've said before the freedom of speech does not guarantee the freedom from consiquence. All parties are guilty let's not think that one political power is above another in this respect. The question is how do the parties respond to this consiquence.