Go West Wing

I’ll have to give this show a chance, because I like political drama. But, I also like forensic science, so I’m one of the freaks that watches the FBI files and Cold Case. And I seem to recall there being several episodes about male rape outside of prison, and various situations where men were tortured as well. *shrug* If we don’t talk about these things how do we change them. And unfortunately in today’s age, the television *is* the media.

I wish that weren’t so, but I do like to hear the detectives or the DA call some cop or other asshole for a sexist comment about victim blaming in a rape case. I suppose it depends on how the issue is depicted and how the process is shown. ie: does the rapist pay and is the victim supported.

P.S. Buffy is also one of my favorite shows ever! Go Scooby Gang!

I’m sure you’re right that Bill Clinton’s hardcore opponents wouldn’t have been appeased; some as a matter of convenience (anything to get him out) and some as a matter of principle. But I’m thinking that there wouldn’t have been enough of them, on their own, to get things rolling to the state that they did where he was impeached and had to drop his domestic agenda to such a low priority. People can understand adultery, but they don’t like being lied to about it. It was that lie, in my opinion, that got enough moderates on board.

Back in the ’70’s, Senator Brooke of Massachusetts (a black Republican!) divorced his wife. He lost his re-election bid. The consensus seemed to be that he didn’t lose because he’d been divorced; he lost because his wife uncovered in a subsequent lawsuit that he had lied to her about his assets and had illegally hidden some of them during the settlement process. Another history lesson that Bill missed. You can do bad stuff and get away with it, but don’t lie about it.

Of course, given the rock-star complexe of the average politician, I’m pretty sure you could empty D.C. in an hour if you could magically detect and expel every married elected official who failed to keep it in his pants while in office. :p

No. As soon as the scandal hit, even before he was forced to testify about it, Bill Clinton should have come out and said something along the lines of, “Yes, I did have sex with that woman. It was a mistake, and it’s something that I’ll have to deal with in my personal life with my wife and children. But I don’t think it has anything to do with whether or not the policies of this Administration are the best thing for this country. I think that those people who are trying to derail those policies by taking advantage of my personal failings are demagogues who are deliberately avoiding the issue and are seeking to thwart the will of the American public through devious means. We need to stop letting the opposition try to take advantage of what I’ve personally done wrong and do what’s right for America .”

Remember that Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached on the basis that he had sex with Monica Lewinsky. He was impeached because he misled and lied about it, and on that basis left himself open to suspicion that he had misled and lied about other things as well. My guess is that if he’d made the above speech, he’d have never been impeached. But I think he acted in a selfish and immature fashion, setting his own personal interests above the interests of the country, and it cost him and the country in the long run.

If this show was about a black male banker or insurance agent during the Jim Crow era and there were constant references to his inferiority, threats to hang him if he infringed on other’s turf, comments about his sexuality, his intelligence, etc., would you expect a strong Black audience? Wouldn’t you expect that the audience would be offended that such a message is still being promoted, yes promoted, in the thinly disquised veil of “drama” or “entertainment”?

This show is sexist and offensive, but both are hidden behind the realistic drama it is supposed to represent. Fuck, there is nothing new about this show, and it is a message I hear just about every day. Why do I have to look to prime time entertainment and find it there? If I were an eight year old girl, the message I would come away with from this show is that woman are indeed inferior — because that is the majority opinion being represented… even by characters that are supposedly there to support her.

Bill Clinton should have fathered a child out of wedlock with Monica Lewinsky ?

LADIES NIGHT AT LEFTY’S LOUNGE IS HOT with anticipation of seeing the first female president in the White House . . . on television . . . oy. PSEUDO ADRIENNE and the PRESIDENT FOR LIFE give takes on what

Amp: Buffy the vampire slayer was quite popular and dramatic. If we can envision vampire slayers, we can envision (and dramatize) a female president.

Hopefully, CiC is intended to be a more realistic show than Buffy was (disclaimer: Buffy is one of my favorite shows ever).

Why could it be dramatic just because she’s the leader of the world’s strongest nation? Why does the drama have to center around her femaleness? … and thus her potential competency?

I don’t agree that any show that focuses on the issues brought up by being the first female president (among other things) has to be questioning her competency. It could also take the point of view that she is competent, and the problem is sexists around her who assume otherwise because she’s a woman.

There could also be a good show based around what you describe - although the truth is, it’s hard to find a TV writer as good as Aaron Sorkin. It takes a lot more skill to write a good West Wing episode than a good Law and Order, which is why there are countless L&O knockoffs and virtually no knockoff West Wings.

In the end, the concept behind the show is going to matter less than how well or poorly they develop the concept. The most feminist concept in the world could made into crap by a bad rendition; and a great rendition will rescue a so-so premise.

I don’t think the “member of oppressed class gets to be president because of unexpected death” set-up is inherently bad; it’s easy to imagine a good show starting from that concept, if the show has good writing and makes the central character capable and interesting.

What bothers me more about CiC is that I hear it’s going to make her family life more of a focus than West Wing does. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that - all Presidents have families, and there are obviously interesting dramatic possibilities in that situation - but it’s galling that they just-so-happen to focus more on the family when the President is a woman.

Well, obviously people don’t ask men about their parenting skills.
But the marital status thing is pretty big — I think it will be quite as long before we have a single President as before we have one that doesn’t attend a religious institution, say. It has been discussed in primaries, and, heck, an entire movie (The American President?) was devoted to public speculation about the romantic possibilities of a sitting President and how they undermined his ability to do his job…

just to set the record straight.

As a man, I have to say that I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the balancing act between family, relationship, and career is posed mostly to women. I think that men don’t talk about it much, but it’s there for them too - at least the ones who give a damn.

I think you’re misreading the issue. It’s not whether men think about family issues, it’s whether those questions become part of the narrative of their political career, the subject of press questions and speculation, etc. And pretty much the answer to the latter is NOPE.

Why could it be dramatic just because she’s the leader of the world’s strongest nation? Why does the drama have to center around her femaleness? …

Because otherwise it’s just the West Wing only not nearly as good. what’s the thing that’s new here? the femaleness. that is, in fact, what the show is about (and because it doesn’t have to imagine a completely different/parallel/future evolved political system this way either).
I’m with Amp that it will probably suck, but that the Vice President-promoted thing is a reasonable starting place. Geraldine Ferraro, anyone?