A Different Disney Perspective
Bloggers are all agog about the right wing slant of the Disney Docudrama on the "steps" along the "path" to 911.
Here's another point of view--never mind the Clinton bashing, the bigger issue is how W comes off. Sorry to put it this way, but W doesn't "come" at all in the Monday night version. In fact, except for an oddly mis-timed ("time-compressed"?) speech on 911, where he's mouthing platitudes even before the full scope of the disaster is clear (as the movie itself points out), there is almost zero Bush "presence."
In fact, his "order" to shoot down flight 93 is so obscure that the movie only quotes Cheney to the effect that he has "received" the president's order. No representation in the film of Bush actually giving that order. (Where to start on that one? Do you not give your order directly to those who are to carry them out, Mr. President? Do you expect that the military can lawfully obey an order that is only quoted to them by the vice-president? -- not under the law -- Why did rather more than an hour pass before you gave any orders at all, Mr. President? When you were doing the pet goat, when it was already clear how severe the damage to the towers was, did you not think there was something for a poor president to do? Oh, that's right, presidents have such a difficult job--what with decisions and all. I know, W, it's so hard that you almost certainly just told Shooter Cheny to do whatever he thinks best, you'll back him up)
The almost total absence of Bush from Part 2 of the DisneyDrama doesn't look to me like a pro-Bush slant. Could Disney have been so insulated from public opinion as to imagine that "less is more" when it comes to showing Bush as the commander in chief?" Old, fat, impotent, white men at Disney can be that insulated, to be sure, but are they that incompetent?
And then of course, the scorecard at the end--carrying out the 911 commission's recommendations--something like 5 to 12 (grade F vs. grade D), with only one A (intercepting terrorist money). Not exactly a ringing endorsement of efforts to protect the homeland.
Here's another point of view--never mind the Clinton bashing, the bigger issue is how W comes off. Sorry to put it this way, but W doesn't "come" at all in the Monday night version. In fact, except for an oddly mis-timed ("time-compressed"?) speech on 911, where he's mouthing platitudes even before the full scope of the disaster is clear (as the movie itself points out), there is almost zero Bush "presence."
In fact, his "order" to shoot down flight 93 is so obscure that the movie only quotes Cheney to the effect that he has "received" the president's order. No representation in the film of Bush actually giving that order. (Where to start on that one? Do you not give your order directly to those who are to carry them out, Mr. President? Do you expect that the military can lawfully obey an order that is only quoted to them by the vice-president? -- not under the law -- Why did rather more than an hour pass before you gave any orders at all, Mr. President? When you were doing the pet goat, when it was already clear how severe the damage to the towers was, did you not think there was something for a poor president to do? Oh, that's right, presidents have such a difficult job--what with decisions and all. I know, W, it's so hard that you almost certainly just told Shooter Cheny to do whatever he thinks best, you'll back him up)
The almost total absence of Bush from Part 2 of the DisneyDrama doesn't look to me like a pro-Bush slant. Could Disney have been so insulated from public opinion as to imagine that "less is more" when it comes to showing Bush as the commander in chief?" Old, fat, impotent, white men at Disney can be that insulated, to be sure, but are they that incompetent?
And then of course, the scorecard at the end--carrying out the 911 commission's recommendations--something like 5 to 12 (grade F vs. grade D), with only one A (intercepting terrorist money). Not exactly a ringing endorsement of efforts to protect the homeland.
<< Home