The ABCs of Pollywood: Commander in Chief

I read an article today by cantankerous conservative JB Williams (http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_2726923.shtml) about ABC’s new hit show Commander in Chief. Mr. Williams charges that the show, about a female Vice President promoted to Commander in Chief after the death of the President, is meant as a salve for “hardened socialist liberals” in need of a fix after years spent under a Bush regime. More importantly, he stresses that the show is merely a platform concerned with prepping the American public for a Hillary Clinton Presidency in 2008.

Last time I checked, JB, Hollywood was interested in Hollywood and not much else. That’s not to say that tinsel-town doesn’t supplement hit scripts with its own political philosophy. Indeed, just watch one episode of Law & Order or West Wing and you’ll see that writers are shrewdly political. But “a nefarious plot to advance the notion of a Hillary Clinton Presidency”? C’mon JB, that’s a bit of a stretch, even for this paranoid, hardened socialist liberal.

For starters, Geena Davis’s President is a Republican-turned-Independent; hardly a Democrat-friendly character. And for those who claim that Donald Sutherland is portraying Republicans in a negative light in his role as Republican speaker of the House, you should take into account that the fictional chief of staff—a man of upstanding character—is also a Republican.

Finally, I’d like to state rather subjectively, that prepping America for a woman president is not a bad thing. Granted, I’m all for Hillary ’08, but that wouldn’t keep me from celebrating a Condoleeza victory instead (well, at least in principal). We should put partisan politics aside and celebrate the progress of Women’s Rights’ champions like Hillary who, despite the abuse of her detractors, would make a strong, capable President.