HILLARY FOR PRES GETS ITS OWN TV SHOW
Let the campaign begin! In case you haven’t noticed the Hillary for President in 08 campaign is in full swing. How else do you explain Hillary’s move to the center on issues like the war on terror, abortion, immigration, taxes, social security…etc. It’s the old Clinton triangulation strategy at work again.
But the best development so far is Hollywood’s effort, specifically ABC, to give the campaign a boost by softening up the public to the idea of a woman president. Witness….Commander in Chief: The Why You Should Vote For Hillary Primer.
Last week, ABC announced that Geena Davis will star as the nation’s first female president in a one-hour drama pilot called Commander in Chief. I don’t have to read a script to know what the show is about. Geena Davis will be a sexy, smart, tough president who get’s the job done. She’ll maintain her principals while remaining compassionate for the little guy. She’ll be conservative on crime and war and liberal on soocial issues. In other words, she’ll be the exact image that Hollywood and the Clinton campaign want you to project onto Hillary. My undertanding is the pilot will include the transition from the previous administration to Davis’s, which will allow the producers and writers one last slam at Bush.
Now a friend of my suggested that it could be just the opposite. They could make Davis a shrill, bitchy conservative so the public might be scared of the idea of a conservative female in office…read…Condoleeza Rice. My response to that is, Geena Davis would never play the role. Besides, it would be to much like the real Hillary!
No, this new show is designed to begin softening the public palate with sweet spoonfuls of low-carb Hillary. And don’t doubt for a minute the production budget on this show is nothing more than a campaign contribution. It’s a brilliant ploy. First, they’ll be able to have a two hour campaign film on a major network. It will be paid for by the advertisers and as long as it’s on the air, they will get to use it to test campaign themes, policy concepts and to sell an image of Hillary being “so much like Geena Davis, it’s uncanny!”
LIBERALS DISCUSSING SHOW:
L1: Did you see Commander in Chief last night?
L2: Yes, I Tivoed it after watching Front Line on PBS. Wasnt’ it fantastic.
L1: Yes, there was so much compassion for those less fortunate. It made
me feel better about myself.
L2: Me too. So much so that I bought a hyrid car and a $400 pair of shoes
that I’m pretty sure were not made by child laborers.
MODERATES DISCUSSING SHOW:
M1: Did you Commander in Chief last night?
M2: I watched it for a little bit. It was on at the same time as my favorite Law
& Order.
M1: Which one?
M2: Law & Order: Evindence Room. You know, it’s the one where they
tell the entire story from the perspective of the clerk in the evidence
room.
M1: Yeah, I don’t like that one. Watching all that paperwork is boring, but
what did you think about Commander in Chief? Would you vote for a
woman for president?
M2: I don’t know, maybe. If she looked like Geena Davis…for sure!
CONSERVATIVES DISCUSSING SHOW
C1: Hey did you watch Commander in Chief last night?
C2: No, I was working late. Did you?
C1: No, my doctor said my blood pressure was way to high.
I wouldn’t be shocked if the Commander in Chief web site had polling and discussion forums as a way of interacting with the audience and gaining some key insight on where to steer the Clinton for President campaign.
The left has lost it’s cloak and been exposed in the mainstream news media, so it’s tough to sell the message on the news these days. Now their best hope is to disguise the message as “entertainment”. On this web site, we’re going to keep a close eye on Commander in Chief, to see how the fictional president influences the real life candidate and visa-versa. Look for our own episodes of Commander in Chief coming soon.
Until then, all conservatives should take heart. Davis is best known for her role in Thelma and Louise, where she drives over a cliff rather than stay married to a man…and in Earth Girls Are Easy, where she did it with an Alien. I don’t think her on screen persona is going to be in touch with the average American.
Anonymous Says: March 13th, 2005 at 11:40 pm
To bastardize a classic quote from Freud, “sometimes a TV show is just a TV show.”
John Says: March 16th, 2005 at 9:01 pm
I wonder if they will have a plot about this female pres and the white house pool guy in the oval office!
Tyrant CEO Says: March 17th, 2005 at 10:02 pm
A woman president? If so, then I definitely look forward to the ‘08 Rice/Powell ticket. (My new dream team) The real question that no one wants to ask though is “Will we need to rename the whitehouse though?”
Julian Says: March 18th, 2005 at 11:16 am
We have previously discussed at this site whether the Bush administration’s chief goal for the Iraq invasion was to control Iraq’s oil supply. Evidence bearing on this discussion has just been made public in a new BBC report. For those interested, please read the article at this link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm. To summarize the article, the Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq’s oil before the 9/11 attacks, sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil. The goal was to undermine OPEC’s control of oil prices and supply. As I previously suggested, the neo-cons wanted people to link Saddam and 9/11 and the believe the WMD hype because they believed they could hood-wink enough simple-minded US citizens (reactionaries?) into believing that the invasion was justified for national security reasons so they could claim substantial public support for the war (and win a second term). In fact, however, all along it was the great oil grab invasion. We’ve been W’d again, and that’s not a good thing. I predict that the scheme will backfire. If the original neo-con plans for Chalabi and Allawi to control the Iraq government had worked out, then the US could have had permanent control of the oil and had military bases in Iraq. Halliburton is building bases in Iraq now, costing us billions. But the Shiite controlled government will never permit us to occupy those bases. So kiss your tax dollars good-bye, or just kiss a Halliburton executive, since he will have your money in his bank account. But the original long-term plan to own Iraq went terribly wrong from both the neo-con and the Big Oil perspectives because they failed to foresee how event would actually unfold in Iraq. Now the neo-cons will have to fall back on other strategies to attempt to destabilize the middle-east and out-maneuver OPEC. One strategy would be to put a guy like Wolfowitz in control of the World Bank (the ultimate economic hit man position), signifiying that the military option failed to acheive the desired effect. To nominate Wolfowitz to be the World Bank chief is tantamount to bringing your Queen out in the chess match. But the neo-cons have positioned themselves miserably in this chess match against OPEC and the middle-east. In addition to the OPEC problem, China, Russia, and the European Union are forming new alliances to ballance global power. And Iraq itself is a hugh problem now. The neo-con inspired war in Iraq has ignited an uncontrollable firestorm of attacks against the Iraqi people and our own troops and contractors. And our military can’t even identify who the enemy is (ultimate nightmare scenerio for our troops forcing them to have to just kill indiscriminantly now), where they are (”they are everywhere and no where” one battle field commander said), or conceive of a way to break the will of the invisible enemy. The problem is not that we don’t have them out-gunned. The problem is that wars aren’t won by winning battles. Wars can only be won by breaking the will of the enemy. How do you break the will of endless numbers of people who are willing to commit suicide or who pray to their god that you will kill them knowing that their own individual death will inspire ten replacements? But, everyone should know the real reason why we are fighting this war in Iraq now - we need oil. We have no options.
Julian Says: March 18th, 2005 at 6:03 pm
I must say that http://www.juancole.com does a much better job summarizing the BBC story than I did today.
sorecarphagus Says: March 19th, 2005 at 11:50 pm
You should probably keep an eye out for a remake of Bewitched where she can just wiggle her nose and make billing records magically appear.
Larry Says: March 28th, 2005 at 10:54 pm
Julian’s comments provide more than enough proof for the theory that marijuana smoking when young causes permanent brain damage.
Damian Delaney Says: July 28th, 2005 at 6:51 pm
You’re right on target with your assessment of the new TV show “Commander In Chief” and I want to do everything I can to help it bomb. If you get the producer’s email address please post it so we can make his life a living hell.
Redneck-killer Says: September 5th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
I see you guys haven’t posted to this site in awhile. Maybe you’re busy helping the people in New Orleans, or attending soldiers’ funerals, or working more to pay for gas, or trailing Cindy around the country as counter-protesters, or you’re depressed and tired and bored and don’t know who to blame.
We’re going to win, neo-cons. We’re going to have your asses in a sling in 2006, and then we could put a fucking cartoon squirrel in the White House and get away with it. You fucked up the New World Order profoundly. The window’s nearly closed - thank Allah!