The writers of the JAG episode "Head to Toe" had their hearts in the right place, but I wonder how aware they are of the excessive power Saudis wield on the United States. Tough the episode, which first aired in 2002, has a disclaimer at the beginning that it's about fictional events, it deals with a real-life Department of Defense regulation which requires female servicemembers to cover themselves almost completely in accordance with Islamic principles when off base. In the story, Harm and Mac defend Lt. Stefanie Donato (Lana Parrilla), who had the temerity to drive a car and show up at a restaurant in Riyadh with her face exposed. Her point that her uniform would be acceptable attire in Brooklyn is countered with the fact that she's in Saudi Arabia. In the end, she is spared from court martial but ordered not to complain any further on the issue. The episode ends with text stating that in January 2002 the DoD rescinded the requirement that women cover themselves up when off base in Saudi Arabia, but kept the requirement that they be escorted by men and they don't drive.
But why did women have to put up with that regulation, in place since 1995? It is mentioned in the episode that Saudi Arabia is an important U. S. ally in the Middle East. What the episode does not mention at all is how powerful Saudi interests have affected America on American soil. When Michael Moore showed up with cameras at the Saudi embassy in Washington, he was shooshed away by the Secret Service. George W. Bush, an honorary Saudi, must have been an excellent choice of U. S. President as far as the Saudis were concerned. So, if a Saudi eccentric were to recruit a bunch of Saudis to destroy an American landmark, he'd be quite safe from American retaliation. Hopefully that will never happen.
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Swing voter decides who Marines will salute
The film: Swing Vote (2008), directed by Joshua Michael Stern. Not to be confused with the 1999 TV movie of the same name.
What happened: Molly (Madeline Carroll), the daughter of drunk Bud Johnson (Kevin Costner), attempts to vote in her father's name at the polling place in Texico, New Mexico (which happens to be a real place, close to the intersection of I-27 and I-40), unwittingly giving him the tie-breaking vote that will determine the outcome of the 2008 presidential election. The incumbent, Andrew Boone (Kelsey Grammer, as a smarter version of George W. Bush), has one of those walk-and-talk meetings with advisors in the corridors of the White House early on in the film. In one hallway, two Marine Corporals (both in their second enlistment) stand guard, wearing dress blue uniforms complete with the white hat. As President Boone passes by, the Marines salute and Boone returns the salute.
Why it's wrong: Despite its Army-like rank insignia, the Marine Corps is a naval service. Marines in uniform wear their hats (covers) when a) outdoors, and/or b) carrying a weapon. Marines in uniform salute only when wearing a cover, otherwise they stand at attention. This is ingrained early on in boot camp: a Marine walking around outdoors in uniform but no cover would be more embarrassed than if he was naked. Likewise for a Marine indoors wearing uniform with cover but carrying no weapon.
So the two Marine guards inside the White House, as far as I can tell, don't carry weapons, so they should not be wearing their covers. Come to think of it, why are there Marines inside the White House, guarding some random hallway? Wouldn't they be outside, guarding the entrance? And even if there are Marines inside the White House, the Secret Service would probably not let them have weapons. Remember in real life how nervous George W. Bush gets around Marines with unloaded rifles (as in Marine Boltgate 2005). Granted, Boone is a much different man from Bush: more articulate, and better educated than Bud Johnson, too. Perhaps Boone wouldn't be afraid of the Marines.
And another thing: I'm somewhat skeptical that a Corporal assigned to the White House would be in his second enlistment. A Marine good enough for a White House assignment would probably be good enough to be a Sergeant by the time he/she earns his/her first service hashmark (the one yellow stripe close to the cuffs in the dress blue uniform jacket, not part of the rank insignia, which is closer to the shoulder). In news footage I've seen Lance Corporals and Corporals at the White House. The Lance Corporal should certainly be in his first enlistment, or else he's done something to get demoted and is probably not worthy of serving at the White House. For a Corporal, this is somewhat borderline, so I suppose one second-enlistment Corporal at the White House is within the realm of possibility. Yet in Boone's White House you have not one but two Corporals in their second enlistment.
Spoiler alert: I'm not going to nitpick the plausibility of the film's basic premise. With almost two million people in New Mexico, it would be rather surreal for any election to come down to one man's vote. But then again, the 2000 presidential election being decided by the Supreme Court was quite surreal, too.
But I think this film wimps out at the end. Bud Johnson goes in to cast his tiebreaking vote, to decide between incumbent Boone and his Democratic opponent, the appropriately named Donald Greenleaf (Dennis Hopper). Presumably, his votes for the lower offices won't matter. After Bud closes the privacy curtain, the end credits roll. His vote remains a dangling thread at the end of the film. Doesn't that weaken the message that voting matters? On the other hand, the film could have been accused of partisanship if the Bud's vote had been shown. It's a no-win situation for writers to put themselves in, I suppose.
What happened: Molly (Madeline Carroll), the daughter of drunk Bud Johnson (Kevin Costner), attempts to vote in her father's name at the polling place in Texico, New Mexico (which happens to be a real place, close to the intersection of I-27 and I-40), unwittingly giving him the tie-breaking vote that will determine the outcome of the 2008 presidential election. The incumbent, Andrew Boone (Kelsey Grammer, as a smarter version of George W. Bush), has one of those walk-and-talk meetings with advisors in the corridors of the White House early on in the film. In one hallway, two Marine Corporals (both in their second enlistment) stand guard, wearing dress blue uniforms complete with the white hat. As President Boone passes by, the Marines salute and Boone returns the salute.
Why it's wrong: Despite its Army-like rank insignia, the Marine Corps is a naval service. Marines in uniform wear their hats (covers) when a) outdoors, and/or b) carrying a weapon. Marines in uniform salute only when wearing a cover, otherwise they stand at attention. This is ingrained early on in boot camp: a Marine walking around outdoors in uniform but no cover would be more embarrassed than if he was naked. Likewise for a Marine indoors wearing uniform with cover but carrying no weapon.
So the two Marine guards inside the White House, as far as I can tell, don't carry weapons, so they should not be wearing their covers. Come to think of it, why are there Marines inside the White House, guarding some random hallway? Wouldn't they be outside, guarding the entrance? And even if there are Marines inside the White House, the Secret Service would probably not let them have weapons. Remember in real life how nervous George W. Bush gets around Marines with unloaded rifles (as in Marine Boltgate 2005). Granted, Boone is a much different man from Bush: more articulate, and better educated than Bud Johnson, too. Perhaps Boone wouldn't be afraid of the Marines.
And another thing: I'm somewhat skeptical that a Corporal assigned to the White House would be in his second enlistment. A Marine good enough for a White House assignment would probably be good enough to be a Sergeant by the time he/she earns his/her first service hashmark (the one yellow stripe close to the cuffs in the dress blue uniform jacket, not part of the rank insignia, which is closer to the shoulder). In news footage I've seen Lance Corporals and Corporals at the White House. The Lance Corporal should certainly be in his first enlistment, or else he's done something to get demoted and is probably not worthy of serving at the White House. For a Corporal, this is somewhat borderline, so I suppose one second-enlistment Corporal at the White House is within the realm of possibility. Yet in Boone's White House you have not one but two Corporals in their second enlistment.
Spoiler alert: I'm not going to nitpick the plausibility of the film's basic premise. With almost two million people in New Mexico, it would be rather surreal for any election to come down to one man's vote. But then again, the 2000 presidential election being decided by the Supreme Court was quite surreal, too.
But I think this film wimps out at the end. Bud Johnson goes in to cast his tiebreaking vote, to decide between incumbent Boone and his Democratic opponent, the appropriately named Donald Greenleaf (Dennis Hopper). Presumably, his votes for the lower offices won't matter. After Bud closes the privacy curtain, the end credits roll. His vote remains a dangling thread at the end of the film. Doesn't that weaken the message that voting matters? On the other hand, the film could have been accused of partisanship if the Bud's vote had been shown. It's a no-win situation for writers to put themselves in, I suppose.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Plot holes, changed premises and continuity errors in the moron's farewell address
This blog is supposed to be about nitpicking fictional shows, not newscasts or special news presentations. But King George W's farewell address last night made me mad not only because it pre-empted one of my favorite shows (despite its brevity) but because it so clearly showed George W. Bush's ignorance of history, fairly recent history even. It's as if his speech was written by one of those lazy sitcom writers who join the staff late in the show's run but don't bother to watch earlier episodes. (And what about Darth Cheney? Absolutely creepy and evil.)
Take, for example, when Bush said "You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made, but I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions." What tough decisions? (Plural). Name just one of those tough decisions. Bush never made any tough decisions. Do I pull the plug on my comatose father when the doctors give him a 30% chance of coming out of it? That's a tough decision. Do I accept a buyout from my job when I'm still two years shy of retirement? That's another tough decision, one which, thanks to Bush's economic policies, many middle-class Americans have had to make. The decisions Bush has made are very easy in comparison: Do I satisfy my desire to give out tax cuts? Do I gratify my desire to attack Iraq even though none of the hijackers were Iraqi? Do I give an excuse for not visiting wounded soldiers and Marines because I just don't like visiting hospitals? Do I appoint to the Supreme Court a friend with no experience as a judge? All Bush's decisions were matters of instant gratification, and each time Bush chose to gratify his desires.
Bush also reminded the people that "America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil." He doesn't know that America had gone two centuries without a terrorist attack, and that that attack took place on his watch. He's conveniently forgotten all the warnings he ignored. Osama bin Laden had wanted to knock down the World Trade Center since the 1990s. By the way, where is Osama bin Laden? So much for smoking him out. Bush said that "Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. And I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe." Yes, you did, every single morning since the day you were sworn in back in January 2001, and also through that crucial date of August 6, 2001. "America did nothing to seek or deserve this conflict." Let's give him that one, for the moment. So... what exactly did Iraq do to "seek or deserve" the conflict which has killed at least twice more of their citizens than 9/11 did of ours? (I'm going off the numbers on icasualties.org). Having a bunch of empty canisters laying around is a good enough reason to bomb them.
"These are very tough times for hardworking families, but the toll would be far worse if we had not acted." And that toll would have been a lot less if you hadn't wasted your predecessor's budget surplus. Supposedly "we will show the world once again the resilience of America's free enterprise system." If it really is so resilient, why was it necessary to bail out the banks? (Remember that the money given to the automotive industry is a loan, not a bailout).
I could go on and on, but I'll just say one more thing: let's ask a rarely asked question, one which Bush himself forgot to ask last night: is our children learning? No, they isn't, not really. All the No Child Left Behind Act has accomplished is to create more headaches for teachers. Because they just didn't have enough with their huge paychecks and lack of additional duties (nurse, babysitter, etc.).
Take, for example, when Bush said "You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made, but I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions." What tough decisions? (Plural). Name just one of those tough decisions. Bush never made any tough decisions. Do I pull the plug on my comatose father when the doctors give him a 30% chance of coming out of it? That's a tough decision. Do I accept a buyout from my job when I'm still two years shy of retirement? That's another tough decision, one which, thanks to Bush's economic policies, many middle-class Americans have had to make. The decisions Bush has made are very easy in comparison: Do I satisfy my desire to give out tax cuts? Do I gratify my desire to attack Iraq even though none of the hijackers were Iraqi? Do I give an excuse for not visiting wounded soldiers and Marines because I just don't like visiting hospitals? Do I appoint to the Supreme Court a friend with no experience as a judge? All Bush's decisions were matters of instant gratification, and each time Bush chose to gratify his desires.
Bush also reminded the people that "America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil." He doesn't know that America had gone two centuries without a terrorist attack, and that that attack took place on his watch. He's conveniently forgotten all the warnings he ignored. Osama bin Laden had wanted to knock down the World Trade Center since the 1990s. By the way, where is Osama bin Laden? So much for smoking him out. Bush said that "Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. And I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe." Yes, you did, every single morning since the day you were sworn in back in January 2001, and also through that crucial date of August 6, 2001. "America did nothing to seek or deserve this conflict." Let's give him that one, for the moment. So... what exactly did Iraq do to "seek or deserve" the conflict which has killed at least twice more of their citizens than 9/11 did of ours? (I'm going off the numbers on icasualties.org). Having a bunch of empty canisters laying around is a good enough reason to bomb them.
"These are very tough times for hardworking families, but the toll would be far worse if we had not acted." And that toll would have been a lot less if you hadn't wasted your predecessor's budget surplus. Supposedly "we will show the world once again the resilience of America's free enterprise system." If it really is so resilient, why was it necessary to bail out the banks? (Remember that the money given to the automotive industry is a loan, not a bailout).
I could go on and on, but I'll just say one more thing: let's ask a rarely asked question, one which Bush himself forgot to ask last night: is our children learning? No, they isn't, not really. All the No Child Left Behind Act has accomplished is to create more headaches for teachers. Because they just didn't have enough with their huge paychecks and lack of additional duties (nurse, babysitter, etc.).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)